Iranian President speaks at Columbia

basso did say he doesn't believe in the principles of the Declaration. He didn't use those words, but his response says it as clearly as if he had written in large bold print, "I DON'T BELIEVE IN THE DECLARATION OF INDEPENDENCE".

 

basso, we aren't talking about hatred of Republicans but Americans who show obvious disdain for the principles that this nation was founded on.

You were asked about those principles aside from legal rights, and you tried to ignore the question and talk about the constitution.

Just like when you were asked about the swift boat vets credibility, you didn't answer and instead tried to make it about John Kerry's credibility. Then you received an answer on Kerry's credibility including links to all of his military records, and still asked about the Swifties credibility you did a disappearing act.

It is clear that once facts, and evidence become uncomfortable for you, you don't face them, you try and run away.

 

He's been doing that for years.

 

i see there is some big mouth basso fishing going on here. catch and release?

 

a private cemetery? how do you figure? and if it is a private cemetery than do you think it is ok to build the so-called freedom tower on top of it? do you think it was ok for giuliani to call off the search and recovery teams and allow the remains of the dead to be scooped up and used for repaving roads?

you do realize that none of the hijackers were iranian, right? 15 of 19 were from saudi arabia, whom the bushs are very close with. you do realize that many of the money trails for the hijackers led to saudi royalty, right? so how would you feel if a saudi prince wanted to visit ground zero?

you do remember that after 9/11 they were holding candlelight vigils in iran for us, while in saudi arabia they were dancing in the streets, right?

 

Confuse the issue? You mean like asking a question about the Declaration and then when you get an answer you don't like, saying you meant the Constitution? Project much?

Hatred of Republicans? On the contrary, I've repeatedly expressed my support for a strong two-party system and have bemoaned the seizure of the "Republican" Party by those who hold neither Republican nor American values, as your posts here so ably demonstrate.

I also love how I've "lost all ability for rational, reasoned thought or discourse" when all I did was quote Thomas Jefferson and James Madison in defense of the Idea of America, yet you, who rejects inalienable rights and supports an administration filled with people who are hard at work destroying the institutions and understandings of our Constitutional government can appoint yourself the arbiter of what is rational. Oh, irony.

 

1) 15 of the 19 hijackers were saudi
2) saudi arabia is a known sponsor of terrorism and their citizens live in a religious police state ruled by a tyrannical family, who violently shut down free speech.
3) some of the funding for the 9/11 hijackers came from saudis.
4) as much noise people make about iran sending arms to iraq, saudi is doing the same thing, but on a much bigger scale.

but they are our allies?

1) pakistan made a truce with al-qaeda to allow them to operate freely in northwestern tribal areas
2) their isi are among the biggest supporters of al-qaeda
3) they have nukes
4) one of their generals was funding mohammad atta.

but they are our allies?

 

yes they do.

 

Reprint of an LA Times article from 2002
http://www.truthout.org/docs_03/080303A.shtml

[rquoter]
One U.S. official who has read the classified section said it describes "very direct, very specific links" between Saudi officials, two of the San Diego-based hijackers and other potential co-conspirators "that cannot be passed off as rogue, isolated or coincidental."

Said another official: "It's really damning. What it says is that not only Saudi entities or nationals are implicated in 9/11, but the [Saudi] government" as well.

[/rquoter]

 

BWAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

do whut? they most certainly do.

 

you are changing the goalposts.

nobody is claiming that he is connected to terrorist activity, but for you to come out and say saudi leaders are not sponsoring terrorism is a pretty damning indicator of how little you know about the issue (especially for someone who goes on about iran like you do).

 

So 'willful ignorance' doesn't qualify as support of terrorists to you?

As long as we are at it, could you post the evidence that directly links Amahdinajad with funding terrorism? As far as I know, no such 'direct links' are public knowledge. So if your judgements are all based on being able to prove direct active links specific to an individual, and if these aren't apparent, then you must be cool with Amahdinajad speaking at ground zero, right?

 

King Abdullah or Saudis in generally, specifically other rich memebrs of the ruling clan? perhaps not Abdullah, but i doubt very much there's much that happens in Saudi, and certainly in the royal family that that doesn't receive at least his tacit approval.

 

Which saudi leaders sponser terrorism...?

Please give me a cross reference site, with names of consequence, and verifiable evidence...

 

New Yorker made the claim, not jo mama ROX. Hell even basso called him on it.