i appreciate that you don't buy the arguement, but a large portion of america does. that you don't doesn't mean it's tired or inaccurate.
to be honest i dont understand how you can support actions that are fundamentally opposed to our modern western way of life in order to preserve that ideology. sounds fairly perverse to me. torture and violence isn't the MO of our society. its the MO of these terrorists. just because you are on the side of 'right' doesn't grant you the authority to transgress. aside from being on this side how are you different from the iraqi insurgents/militants/terrorists (pick the word)? they are willing to take any means necessary to accomplish their goal and so are you. what distinguishes right from wrong is that they aren't willing to take 'any means' but only the proper and just means to accomplish their goals.
i don't know what to make of this, or how reliable the site is, but this certainly is interesting, and, as they say, developing... http://www.homelandsecurityus.com/ "Preliminary reports from a source inside the Pentagon indicate that one of the operatives involved in this morning's bombings in London was recently released from the prison at Guantanamo."
Yeah, somehow keeping terrorists in a prison where they are well fed, get medical treatment, and have their holy book to read doesn't change them into peace loving people.
ACtually that is pretty much exactly how it happened. Saddam did not harbor terrorists inside Iraq. He did pay families of suicide bombers outside of Iraq, but it was only a small portion of the funds. The funds were given to all who were considered martyrs that died in the conflict with Israel. Suicide bombers make up a very small fraction of those seen as martyrs. Saddam never hosted terrorist groups inside IRaq, and wasn't involved in planning, or supplying terrorists. There is plenty of things Saddam did, that make him a horribe person, there is no need to make up stuff he isn't guilty of, unless of course you need a reason to invade after the original one didn't work out.
But it does keep them locked up, and it can be done through the rule of law, and sticking to American principles.
Abe Lincoln used similar tactics to Bush when the Civil War started and look how he ended up looking.
Abe Lincoln was fighting to preserve the United States of America. Iraq isn't a war to preserve the U.S.
Page 612 of the Propaganda Handbook, "To rebuild popular confidence and support for an untenable or unethical policy, connect the policy to other unrelated terrorist actions to use as continued justification."
I doubt you'd say that to the face of someone who lost their child in the 9-11 attacks. Seriously, you are sickening. To downplay the threat of terrorism on the very day that tens of people were killed as a result of it. What are we supposed to do, IGNORE IT? Would that MAKE YOU HAPPY?
I believe I asked you to prove your statement about MILLIONS of muslims celbrating 9-11, and that one video played on fox news showing some arabian people dancing for whatever reason is not proof that MILLIONS of MUSLIMS were celebrating 9-11. And I have a Serious Question. Why so much media coverage and so much fuss about this event? I mean 37 people died. A year ago I think in Madrid 100 people died, and the buzz about it was minimal. There are about 30 people dying weakly in Iraq due to bombs(just like the ones in London) and all it gets is a page 6 report in the Papers. Honestly, Its sickening when any civillians are hurt due to the actions or retaliations of anyone. Civillians are never to be hurt. That is what MY religion teaches me. And anyone that doesnt folllow the commands of the religion is not part of the religion. And do we have any POSITIVE Confirmation on who did this? or are we still speculating?
Would you tell the family of a dead fire fighter who lost his life trying to save others on 9/11 that you and your party cut 125 million dollars they were promised?
Obviously you acknowledge that making light of terrorism is unacceptable, otherwise you would have responded to my question posed to Rashmon. You changed the subject because you had no good response. Sad. Pulling back the reigns on spending isn't even in the same ballpark as making light of the terrorism threat when thousands of Americans have died. Surely even the most partisan among us can recognize that. So why do you mix yourself up in such a manner? One day you are bemoaning budget deficits, the next you are complaining about cutting spending? Doesn't add up, now does it? You'll look for anything to mock, regardless of your own consistency.
I just posed a question to show that contrary to your portrayal one side does not own the right to claim to be champions of those who gave their life on 9/11. eliminating the debt will cut govt. spending by nearly 15%. I am all in favor of that.
