Freedom Images...

[Prime]

@John Ess

Is that really true? It says the turnout was 57%.

57% of eligible voters maybe, certainly not 57% of Americans.

[gotlucky]

@LogisticEarth

Anyway, back to regularly scheduled programming:

Thanks. Those are some good pics. This thread needed them badly.

[gotlucky]

@Daniel Muffinburg

Although it is true, I find it disgraceful that Rainn Wilson is used to convey the message.

Why? Just wondering.

[DanielMuffinburg]

@gotlucky

@Daniel Muffinburg

Although it is true, I find it disgraceful that Rainn Wilson is used to convey the message.

Why? Just wondering.

Because he is the village idiot.

[gotlucky]

Ahem, Kevin is the village idiot. But I see your point. lol

[gotlucky]

Come to think of it, Andy is the village idiot, Michael Scott is the village idiot, Kelly is the village idiot…that show is full of idiots. Yikes!

[Anenome]

Yeah like that would ever happen.

[excel]

I posted it as a comment on tactics and that alone.

It is despicable for the Palestinians to place rocket emplacements and the like near civilian positions to force Israelis to potentially injure innocents in order to defende themselves.

Do you lambast the israeli’s as similarily despicable for putting women and children (and other civilians) in settlements built on occupied territory acquired through war to force Palestinians to potentially injure innocents in order to take back their land?

[Anenome]

@excel

Do you lambast the israeli’s as similarily despicable for putting women and children (and other civilians) in settlements built on occupied territory acquired through war to force Palestinians to potentially injure innocents in order to take back their land?

I do, but such a dispute should be handled through a dispute resolution / tort, not by armed conflict on anyone’s part. A settlement dispute is at its heart a property dispute and should be handled as one. If the mediator hands it over to the Israelis, fine, if the Palestinians, fine.

But if the Palestinian territories are then used to lob missiles at the Israelis, they should defend themselves as humanely as possible.

[Anenome]

Here, I moved my post here, out of the picture thread. Please put your reply there:

https://forum.freecapitalists.org/t/preserving-nap-in-gaza/25230

Unfortunately I cannot delete / edit the above post, but let’s move any replies to the appropriate thread.

[thetabularasa]

@Clayton

The difference is in putting explosives on children and using them as weapons. How many Israelis vs. Palestinians have done this, Clayton?

Well, given the nihilistic, flesh-eating mentality of the neocons (many of whom are, coincidentally(?), Zionists…), we should be applauding the Palestinians who are at least making good use of the children they kill in terms of “hitting back at their enemy” whereas when the Israelis kill Palestinian children it only worsens their problems by radicalizing Palestinians even further. Bad strategy.

But the real issue is that killing children - or anyone for that matter - is reprehensible and disgustingly immoral. Draping a flag over the killer and declaring him and his gang-lords to be immune from the proper legal consequences of their crimes creates precisely the sort of wanton, barbaric behavior that economic theory and praxeology predicts. This is a global phenomenon, it is not restricted to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. The Elites turn our attention to Israel/Palestine to deflect it away from the very same conflict they are creating here at home, on the streets of our neighborhoods where heavily armed men are beating and shooting people virtually at will. If you’ve followed the LRC or the Police Brutality/Aggression thread, you will be well aware of what I’m talking about.

If you’re going to have an opinion on the conflict, it would do you well to get educated about the facts, which are heavily distorted by the MSM and the political establishment, many of whom are beholden to the Zionist lobby one way or another. Ask yourself why these guys are shaking hands with a man who has supposedly vowed to wipe them off the face of the map?:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=waIItLileq4

This guy can help you get started:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TOaxAckFCuQ

Clayton -

All that and still no answer to my question: The difference is in putting explosives on children and using them as weapons. How many Israelis vs. Palestinians have done this, Clayton? No more strawman arguments, please. Just an answer.

[ClaytonB]

All that and still no answer to my question: The difference is in putting explosives on children and using them as weapons. How many Israelis vs. Palestinians have done this, Clayton? No more strawman arguments, please. Just an answer.

I don’t know. There’s your answer.

I know there are Palestinian terrorists who do because they’re blatant about it. But who stands behind them? Who funds them? No one? Does Mossad use this tactic? Do Mossad agents disseminate knowledge in explosives and other tactics to Palestinian terrorists? Do they work with external intelligence agencies (Jordanian, Egyptian, etc.) who do? We’ll never know because they work in the shadows.

But this is all a distraction from the real question we should be asking: Who is killing children (or any non-combatants, for that matter)? The answer is that Palestinian terrorists and the IDF/Mossad are both killing. And if you want to play the “who is killing more than who?” game, the Israelis are far and away the most prolific killers - whether of children or adults - in this conflict.

Clayton -

[Anenome]

[John_Ess]

" That’s of eligible voters, not the population."

So children, prisoners, and immigrants would’ve changed the results?

How can anyone know without data?

[Anenome]

@John Ess

" That’s of eligible voters, not the population."

So children, prisoners, and immigrants would’ve changed the results?

How can anyone know without data?

I think he misspoke or was referring to the 51% figure, as in the 51% that voted for Obama is a percentage only of those that actually voted. The idea that the majority voted for no one is likely drawn from the idea that a majority of the total eligible population does not vote at all. So, if less than 50% of elegible voters voted at all, then the majority voted for no one.

[abirkmanis]

Even if more than 50% of elegible voters voted, it is still possible that “no one for president” has got a (simple) majority.

[ClaytonB]

Just felt like re-posting this classic:

Armed Chinese Troops in Texas!

“Armies cannot stop an idea whose time has come” - Victor Hugo

The rEVOLution has only just begun…

Clayton -

[John_Ess]

“So, if less than 50% of elegible voters voted at all, then the majority voted for no one.”

But we already know that 57% (or upto 60%) of eligible voters turned and voted for someone.

Of that number of, around 51% went for Obama. 47 for Romney. .99% Gary Johnson. .36% Jill Stein.

This means that around 40 to 43% voted for no one.

[Anenome]

@John Ess

“So, if less than 50% of elegible voters voted at all, then the majority voted for no one.”

But we already know that 57% (or upto 60%) of eligible voters turned and voted for someone.

Of that number of, around 51% went for Obama. 47 for Romney. .99% Gary Johnson. .36% Jill Stein.

This means that around 40 to 43% voted for no one.

Seems you’re correct:

Thursday’s report, from the Center for the Study of the American Electorate, put 2012 voter turnout at 57.5% of all eligible voters, compared to 62.3% who voted in 2008 and 60.4% who cast ballots in 2004. In 2000, the turnout rate was 54.2%.

The group estimated 126 million people voted in the election, where President Barack Obama defeated GOP nominee Mitt Romney. That means 93 million eligible citizens did not cast ballots.

So the only way that pict can be correct is by including non-eligible voters, such as children, in its reasoning, which seems disingenuous.

[grant.w.underwood]

In a majority wins election 40-43% wins the majority vote