What is Digg?367 Comments
- Chewie67, on 10/11/2007, -21/+241Jesus Christ. Is this world politics or 7th grade?
This whole story sounds like a bunch of 7th grade girls bitching over some boy. Grow up. - sarazen, on 10/11/2007, -17/+224Meh, sounds more like they are missing the political expedience of the cold war. They don't want war, they just don't want us to sell any munitions or war toys to Taiwan. This same sort of thing comes up every few years. We mildly acknowledge that Taiwan exists separately from China, China rattles its sabers to remind everyone they want Taiwan back, and then proceeds to sell us more cheap crap, and we hold off on selling warhogs to the Taiwanese. Everybody is happy.
- defectDS, on 10/11/2007, -12/+139Just give them back what they want: Jack Bauer.
- robbh66, on 10/11/2007, -19/+120"We gotta Digg this up to the main page!!! And not let the CIA op Digg brigade keep us from getting the info out!"
And you wonder why Digg does not take things like this seriously.... - robbh66, on 10/11/2007, -54/+145"The people who support Bush are ***** tratiors.
Get the hell outta my country."
I don't support him, but I'd rather people like you get the ***** out before people who do support him move an inch. - Pseudorious, on 10/11/2007, -18/+99Freedom of speech will not be abridged at Chinese gunpoint.
- teiq, on 10/11/2007, -36/+103my god, you people are such idiots. "prisonplanet" is just some nutbag conspiracy website, most of their stories are lies. just look at the adverts for "rare substance from nepal lets you live forever", and water filters so the government can't control your mind.
digg, stop being so sensationalist. - AzDraon, on 10/11/2007, -11/+75This is not news, this happens every couple of years.
- JohnReb, on 10/11/2007, -14/+64It's from prisonplanet.
Without corroboration, I don't believe it. - Terr01, on 10/11/2007, -5/+50I think we should be very careful to note that--in addition to wanting us to not sell arms to Taiwan--a good part of this is probably playing for domestic political support. (Sure, they may have a one-party government, but there are still factions inside.)
- sonofdy1, on 10/11/2007, -13/+56Its a good way to get out of the debt. ;-)
- NegativeTwo, on 10/11/2007, -12/+50Any chance somebody can find a similar story on a legitimate website? I don't get my news from overblown blogs.
- SpaceMonkeyZero, on 10/11/2007, -2/+38Translating the web page shows such gems as:
# Video : Lee Teng-hui in Tokyo airport was attacked beverage bottles
# Video : puppy pull carts send high paraplegia poured masters
# Video : big puppy dog blow hold in the mouth parts to assist in running - robbh66, on 10/11/2007, -4/+37Actually, we wiped the floor with Iraq's military in just a few short weeks- both times.
Occupying the country is the hard part. Too difficult to occupy countries these days. - STONECRUSHER420, on 10/11/2007, -27/+59I am an Texan, but I have visited China and Taiwan. These are two countries we DON'T want to start a war with! We can't even handle Iraq.... we better respect China as a force to be reckoned with!!!
- waxoff, on 10/11/2007, -1/+32@stonecrusher420
No one doubts the Chinese are a force to be reckoned with. The question is do we want the Chinese government telling us who we can and cannot shake hands with? I don't care how powerful the Chinese are. The answer is no. - Feeves, on 10/11/2007, -5/+35JCM you have it backwards. Well not exactly but it certainly isn't as lopsided as you beleive.
In actuality the balance between China and America is very precarious. We can't mess with them because they can destroy our commerce in an instant, they don't want to mess with us because we are militarily stronger and they want their money. - Auerbeck, on 10/11/2007, -8/+33How dare that warmonger Bush show basic courtesy and shake hands with a foreign dignitary! The peaceful nation of China can only take so much provocation, how else would they respond!
This incident has Carl Rove's fingerprints all over it. - therightside, on 10/11/2007, -13/+37Uh, tell me when the war starts. You freaks are in mass hysteria about nothing. I thought we were bombing Iran 1st and then china. What happened to the Iran war you all promised?
Still waiting..... - JohnReb, on 10/11/2007, -6/+30Sorry, I missed where you had corroboration of this story.
Is wanting more than a single source a bad thing where you come from? - hydrosnowman, on 10/11/2007, -2/+25Nothing new...China gets angry even if any US official looks at Taiwan on a map.
- sonofdy1, on 10/11/2007, -20/+42-We can win this war with china. The have to cross a body of water and our navy would clean thiers up.
-Equating different wars is stupid. This would be nothing like iraq or korea or vietnam.
-China has been building up to taken on taiwan and the usa for decades now and this has been ignored since the 50's. Bush shaking somebodies hand is only an excuse.
-War with china has been inevitable for years. The only way to avoid it is for china to fall into civil war. Again.
- China thinks (thanks to the us media) that the us military could not respond effectively. They are wrong. - VastSully, on 10/11/2007, -14/+35I doubt this will get any media attention- It has nothing to do with rich spoiled celebrities.
If Britney Spears or that horrible Hilton was involved, it would be front page news! - sonofdy1, on 10/11/2007, -7/+24No need to nuke them. There is no land bridge to taiwan so we just sink them in the straits.Chinas numeric advantage doesn't come into play. They are more likely to nuke us or start another korean war.
- fuzzmeister, on 10/11/2007, -5/+21Uh, what truth? The US media isn't reporting on this because this is a rather regular occurrence between the US and China, and nothing ever comes of it.
- inactive, on 10/11/2007, -6/+22"jcm, look at all the labels of items in your house. What do they say? "Made in China", I bet for 90% of them. So what happens if we halt trade? Stores would look oddly empty..."
- Doesn't that mean that they're reliant on us as customers? Suddenly banning all Chinese goods may shock our economy, but we can recover by importing more from other countries or making it ourselves. China would have harder time finding someone to sell those goods to. Besides, how many of those items are made by companies that are headquartered in China? I'm willing to go out on a limb and say that most of them are owned by American, European, or Japanese companies...
You people have it all backwards. - jmpeagle, on 10/11/2007, -17/+33@alexjonesfan
find one professor/engineer/student that is currently at or graduated from the top 5 engineering schools in the world that believes anything but the official/correct story - swavalier711, on 10/11/2007, -10/+26@sonofdy1
a brilliant idea. If we kill them off...
oh wait. We're the US, we have to fight ethically. Well, *****. - kolobcreek, on 10/11/2007, -4/+19What a bunch of pussies. How long ago did they have control of Taiwan? OH wait.... Never?
China. We like you. Just the way you are. Stop trying to be a bunch of land grabbing socialist *****. - robotsongs, on 10/11/2007, -30/+45*****-- China owns all of our debt. We CANNOT ***** with them as they hold our key to financial stability.
- Feeves, on 10/11/2007, -5/+20China is not a country we can instantly win against. It'd be more like the German invasion of Russia. It's geography is comparable to ours and far more people. In a long drawn out war their manufacturing capabilities more closely resemble ours during WWII.
They also have the possibility of destroying our commerce. There's more than one way to fight a war. They wouldn't declare war on us though. Nor would we ever on them. - Gtitian, on 10/11/2007, -11/+25AlexjonesFan: Firstly, the burden of proof lies on you. Secondly I hate bush and think he should be impeached and possibly tried for warcrimes. But the idea that a conspiracy of the magnitude you "truthers" describe is even possible requires more faith than a religion. It's not possible. You. are. wrong.
- therightside, on 10/11/2007, -7/+21No its not. Nothing is going to come of it. But you can keep smoking your weed and waiting for the aliens if you want to.
- sonofdy1, on 10/11/2007, -4/+17how much do i get paid and where is my check?
- nebrfan, on 10/11/2007, -2/+15@Drexus - So....let me get this straight.....Bush shook the hand of a leader of relatively democratic Taiwan - Communist totalitarian China does some saber rattling...and it's Bush's fault? Don't get me wrong - Bush is far from a great leader - but not EVERYTHING is his fault
- scubasteve377, on 10/11/2007, -2/+14@alexjonesfan
Ok here you go, we’ll go through these one by one so we don’t lose you. Now before I begin I would like for you to take a second to think about the way you speak in everyday life. Nobody is perfect and everyone will misspeak every now and then. The difference is when you say something there aren’t cameras everywhere to make sure your accidental speech is able to be played over and over and over again on news outlets and over the internet so over-zealous conspiracy theorists can over analyze and take things out of context to make them say what they want. I find it especially rediculous to make this big of a deal of Bush, a man who is notorious for misspeaking and mispronouncing even in rehearsed speaches , saying one thing when he means another. You see alexjonesfan everyone else saw the same little video and audio clips you did but was able to dissmiss it with a simple, “I know what he meant.” So without further ado, lets get started.
1.http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=4841608667647433773&q=bush+saw+1st+plane+hit+tower&hl=en Bush- "I saw an airplane hit the tower..." George Bush is from Texas and if you were at all familiar with the way people from TX speak it would be common for anyone from this region to leave out the implied word [had]; as in: "I saw an airplane [had] hit the tower..." Which would have been perfectly accurate in the context of reality where the fact that a plane had hit the tower was all over the news right after it occurred.
2.http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=7171005197553914151&q=rumsfeld+flight+93+shot+down&hl=en Rumsfeld- “or the people who shot down the plane over Pennsylvania…” First of all, I was unable to find a version of this video that actually allows Rumsfeld to finish his sentence which tells me that it was most likely taken out of context in some way or another. For all we know he could have corrected himself immediately after the video cuts off. Either way I would say this goes back to what I said above, this is more than likely just accidental speech. He was in the middle of making a point (what it was we’ll never know because of the way the video was edited) and began rattling off events in which terrorism was used against the US and probably just misspoke. It would be after all an amazing development if one of the evil genius masterminds behind what would be the biggest and most horrifying government conspiracies would have been stupid enough to just accidentally admit to the US involvement in the downing of United Flight 93 and at the same time implying that they also carried out the attacks in NY and DC.
3. http://www.the7thfire.com/Politics%20and%20History/Missile-Not-Flight-77.html Rumsfeld-“…using an American Airlnes flight filled with our citizens, and the missile to damage this building and similar (inaudible) that damaged the World Trade Center.” Ok, disregarding the fact that the website in question looks extremely homemade and does not site anything resembling an official source (just a broken url to a pentagon website and another homemade archive created by the writer himself), I think it is fairly obvious what the man meant to say or did say and was misquoted, -“…using an American Airlines flight filled with our citizens [as a] missile to damage this building…” It’s called using the context in the sentence. As it is written in the article it makes absolutely no sense and sounds barely a shade above gibberish. Even the writer admits it could have been “a bad choice of words” or a “transcription error. In the very next line, part of the interview is described as being “inaudible.”
4. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0hNmf76GUCw Guliani- “We were operating out of there when we were told that the World Trade Center was going to collapse. And it did collapse before we could actually get out of the building. So we were trapped in the buidling for ten- fifteen minutes…” The context of this statement is difficult to determine without actually being able to ask guliani himself to clarify it. For all we know, someone outside may have seen the building beginning to come down and warned them as it was happening. The fact that Guliani and his staff were still in the buliding when it did come down would support this theory. More likely though, this was another instance of someone saying something and meaning something else. What he was most likely trying to convey was something along the lines of, “we were told that the World Trade Center [may] collapse.” Indicating someone warned them about the possibility of the tower collapsing. Seriously, if Mayor Guliani was an accomplice to a horrific government plot of this magnitude, do you really think he would have then turned around and blabbed the next day to the national media about how he was warned all about it? I think that’s the type of ***** that would get you permanently banned from attending future secret evil-doer meetings.
5. http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-7750532340306101329&q=Larry+silverstein Silverstien- “I remember getting a call from the fire department commander telling me they were not sure they were going to be able to contain the fire. I said, you know, we’ve had such terrible loss of life, maybe the smartest thing to do is pull it. And they made that decision to pull. And we watched the building collapse.” Now for those unfamiliar with the Alex Jones explanation here, the conspiracy theorists will explain that in the world of the building demolition the phrase “Pull it” is the order to detonate a controlled blast to bring a building down. But perhaps in this instance, the property leaseholder, Larry Silverstien was recalling telling the FD commander to pull the firefighting effort away from the building and let it burn to remove the firefighters from any further harm. This makes sense in the context of the statement. Otherwise why mention the “terrible loss of life?” What would a statement like that or the fire chief’s warning that they couldn’t control the blaze have to do with setting off a controlled demolition with charges that were supposedly set before hand to take down all three buildings in the first place?
6. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EA5AmFpQlJA The video would not play so I couldn’t get an exact quote but I have seen this before. The basic idea here is that a man eye witnessed what he describes as a missile hitting the Pentagon. This is an easy one. So you want me to believe that a random guy off the streets can tell the difference between a Boeing 757 whizzing by at around 500 mph at low altitude and an actual missile as it slams into the Pentagon and makes a huge fireball.Please. Besides, the broad definition of the word “missile” is simply an object intended to be launched into the air (http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/Missile) in which case a jumbo jet would definitely qualify.
7. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KLnaogsm60A Kerry-“I do know that that wall, I remember was in danger and they made a decision based on the danger that it had to destroying other things that they did it in a controlled fashion.” OK well I don’t think Bush would be bringing his political opponents in on plot if one actually existed. Nevertheless this is another quote which is very vague and it does not include any use of the word demolition as you would have us believe. Kerry simply stated that “they did it in a controlled fashion,” which could mean a number of things. For instance, clearing personnel out of harms way and letting the fire take the building. Much in the same way as firefighters will surround and contain a wildfire and let the area already ablaze burn out.
8. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6K5M0xtxQVQ Bush- “Let us never tolerate outrageous conspiracy theories concerning the attacks of September the Eleventh; malicious lies that attempt to shift the blame away from the terrorists themselves. Away from the guilty.” In this instance Bush said exactly what he meant to say. He didn’t implicate himself or anyone else for that matter aside from the terrorist in 9/11 so I would say this doesn’t even qualify as a ‘slip up’. At all. Moving on.
9. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C7SwOT29gbc In this video a BBC journalist reports that 7 World Trade Center has collapsed approx. 20 minutes before its actual collapse. Throughout the video that very same building is apparently seen smoking in the background. Not being a New Yorker, I couldn’t tell you whether or not the building that appears to have black smoke rising from it actually was 7 WTC. Regardless, those of us who remember the newscasts of that day remember there was as much conjecture, rumors, and false information as there was credible information. It is not so far fetched to think that a foreign news organization from 4,000 miles away may have received information that stated 7 WTC was on the verge of collapse and misinterpreted it to think that it had already collapsed. Notice how there was no real specific information about the collapse of the building, only that It had collapsed. The BBC’s official statement on the matter can be read here: http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/theeditors/2007/02/part_of_the_conspiracy.html
Well there you have it. I hope we all learned something here today. And I know what your thinking alexjonesfan (if you have actually read this far) that I am some kind of ‘Bush-loving treasonous traitor.’ The truth is I can’t stand the man and I believe he is, if not the worst president in our history, at least the worst in my lifetime. I feel this way because to his shameless powergrabbing and exploitation of September 11 to drag the nation into a meaningless war for his own personal fulfillment among other things. These are facts that can be readily proven, they are not based on blind guesses, quotations taken out of context and outright deceptions that just happen to line up with what you want to believe is true. What people like Alex Jones do by creating false accusations and ridiculous theories about 9/11 by saying it was an inside job, is damage the credibility of those of us who have legitimate gripes about the government. So in closing what I have decided to do is take a cue from my friend Ron Paul and offer a little prescribed reading. So before you go and watch the ‘Loose Change’ video again take a look at http://www.loosechangeguide.com/LooseChangeGuide.html and http://www.thebestpageintheuniverse.net/c.cgi?u=911_morons .
Well alexjonesfan I did it I ‘debunked’ all the ***** you wanted and I didn’t break down and call you a ***** RETARD for buying into this *****! oops ***** does that count?
BTW BitchAss it seems like a patriotic American such as yourself wouldn't say ***** like "I'll be in Canada when the draft comes." It seems like a patriotic American would stay in his own country and stand up for his rights like a ***** man. Your so pathetic your even a coward on the internet. - jamessavik, on 10/11/2007, -1/+13We can put a dress on Red China and try to make it look respectble but they are still the same ghoulish bastards that harvest the organs of petty criminals and charge the family of executed political dissidents for the bullets.
Let's call them what they are: Red China couldn't even spell human rights. The US shouldn't even be doing business with Red China much less give them most favored nation status. - waxoff, on 10/11/2007, -3/+15@Auerbeck
That is ***** hilarious. Except that a significant portion of the digg population actually believes it. - robbh66, on 10/11/2007, -5/+16"They also have the possibility of destroying our commerce."
I disagree 100%. China is built on manufacturing and selling that ***** to us. We stop buying, they don't have anyone to sell most of their stuff to. We lose ***** we want (Stuff) and they lose ***** they need(money).
Furthermore- in a prolonged war their industries would be pumping out war machines while ours has transitioned largely to other areas and can adjust as needed. Yes, their manufacturing capability vastly outnumbers ours now but look at what the technological superiority of the US military did against the Iraqi military both times - absolutely decimated them with few losses. - azAZ09, on 10/11/2007, -2/+13Using fear to manipulate Taiwan is the real point to this saber-rattling. China has been using the military option to threaten Taiwan since the '90's. If China did attack Taiwan the US has little hope of defending it politically diplomatically or militarily at this point.
- Auerbeck, on 10/11/2007, -2/+13I don' know what Bush would say, but that would be my reply.
- nanboya, on 10/11/2007, -1/+11***** China, go Taiwan!
- kunradish, on 10/11/2007, -0/+10I think if china were to attack us then boom NATO ties kick in and we get backed up by Belgium,Canada, Denmark,France,Iceland Italy,United Kingdom,Germany and a bunch of other places and those military;s combined would be more then enough to beat china and remember china is not in the Warsaw pact the last i checked. it would be pretty much china versus the western world. also feeves remember during WWII the us very quickly changed from making light bulb's into tanks. thanks to a few things passed by congress.
- DogHumpsMonkey, on 10/11/2007, -0/+10@nwoantibody
You do realize that the Chinese are very well aware that if they launch a nuke on this country there will be retaliation in kind, don't you? And that the Chinese are very well aware that we can destroy their entire country a hundred times over, don't you? Do you honestly think M.A.D. (Mutually Assured Destruction) only applied to the Soviets? No one will use nukes against a nuclear power because that opens the ultimate Pandora's box. The Chinese may have ambitions, but the Chinese aren't stupid. - inactive, on 10/11/2007, -23/+32If China is overly aggressive it can say goodbye to trade with the US and A, and possibly the EU. If they lose the US and A and the EU China won't be much better off than Haiti. I'm guessing that China is bluffing.
- luperry, on 10/11/2007, -2/+11not gonna bother translating the whole thing, but they basically said president Chen of Taiwan is lying/cheating his citizens, they are also objecting to the fact that Taiwan will be holding a poll on whether to join the UN, and they will not tolerate Taiwanese independence.
not a word about war, I don't even hear anything about US. - sonofdy1, on 10/11/2007, -12/+21One point, if this war were to happen, trade would be cut off. It might actualy be good for america in the long run.
- brewer, on 10/11/2007, -15/+24alexjonesfan:
I'll bite, but I'm probably wasting my time. People like you can't be convinced.
1. Bush saw the first plane hit live on tv:
Honestly don't know what to say about that. All I can say is he was pandering to the audience, trying to sound personable, and got caught in a lie (if it was a lie, I don't know).
2. Rumsfeld Says Flight 93 was shot down:
People say things they don't mean to say. That doesn't mean it's a Freudian slip.
3. Rumsfeld Says Missle Hit Pentagon:
Look up the definition of "missile". Hell, I'll do it for you: "A missile is, in general, a projectile—that is, something thrown or otherwise propelled. Missiles can range from a rock thrown from a slingshot, through a crossbow..." In other words, anything that is propelled through the air as a projectile. A guided airplane fits this definition.
4. NYC Mayor Slips- Knew Collpase in Advance:
Didn't watch this one.
5. SilverStein Admits WTC Was Pulled:
If you listen to what he actually said you would hear that he was talking about pulling the firefighters out of the building, and watching the building fall. "Pull" is a commonly used term in firefighting, and not in demolition.
6. EyeWitness Said Missle, eh Plane Hit pentagon:
Again, the definition of "missile." Just because you didn't know it, doesn't mean nobody else does.
7. John Kerry Slips says WTC-7 Was Controlled Demolition:
It's obvious here that Kerry doesn't know many facts at all, and that he needs to look into it in order to discuss it. This was a weak attempt at conspiracy "evidence".
8. Bush is scared:
What the hell is this supposed to be? This is nothing.
9. BBC Reports WTC-7 "Collpase" Early:
And Dewey beat President Truman in the 1948 Presidential election. In such hectic and traumatic circumstances people get the news wrong all the time. News agencies are so concerned about the "breaking" news stories that they will put hear-say and rumors on the air without even thinking twice.
And finally, who do you think works at Popular Mechanics? Scientists can be authors and editors too, moronicus! - sonofdy1, on 10/11/2007, -15/+24Oh stop it. You really have fallen hard for the propoganda haven't you?
- sonofdy1, on 10/11/2007, -4/+12Feeves:
You point about having the largest land army is well taken however they have to actualy get them to taiwan. Taiwan is an island and we can sink thier navy all day long without engaging thier land army. This is the only reason taiwan still exists.
If we had to stop trade with china, yes it would hurt us, but it would force us to rebuild our industry HERE. Which in the long run is a good thing in my opinion. A few millionares would lose thier shirts. Big deal. -
Show 51 - 100 of 332 discussions
Digg is coming to a city (and computer) near you! Check out all the details on our 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is