Jump to content

Should President Bush use images of 9/11 in his campaign ads?

LostInSpace
 Share

Recommended Posts

Kalshion LT. Commander

Kalshion

Posted
Posted

quote:
Originally posted by Jaguar:

If Clinton and his criminal cronies in the Democratic party had not destroyed our intelligence networks, had not gutted our military, had not made sorry with every tinpot dictator and Muslim crazy in the world, we would never have had a 911.

Glad I'm not the only one who thinks of Clinton as a traitor, (and Kerry as a traitor as well to be honest)

To be quite honest people I lost several friends to 9/11 and almost nearly lost my brother! Who do I blame for all this? I blame Clinton cause he basicly gutted our intelligence agencie's. Becuase of that we hardly ever got any intell on this 9/11 stuff, IF intell had been left alone then this could've been provented. All this trash that bush knew this was coming is BULLSHIT

The president is but a meer puppet, congress controls the nation and what they say goes. Even if bush had TRIED to do anything (like shut down the air ports on that day) it would never fly with congress cause they would 'Think they where always right'

Congress was very wrong in this situation, they thought the intell was bogues, in other words.. THEY PLAYED WITH HUMAN LIVES and, in a sense, got themselves killed

Clinton

Congress

Kerry

Democrats

Republicans

Saddly, in a sense there ALL Traitors to this country, they have done NOTHING to improve the country in any way,shape, or form

....

The US has always gotten into everyones bussiness tahts the way we are, nothing that the citizens can do will change that unless of course we have another revolution (which I beleave is coming)

All you people who say "Well if we leave them alone they'll leave us alone" are completly clueless and have no clue what their talking about.WE are not muslums, therefor they'll CONTINUE to attack us NO MATTER what!

In fact, take a look at whats happening now! THEIR attacking there own people, there own muslum people. They could careless if they kill a child.. or an adult.. and they could careless if we where to pullout.. or not.. they'll CONTINUE to attack us no matter what it takes

Arghs.. politics.. a subject I hate but interests me in some way. The only way the US will get back to normal is if we have a full blown revolution, thats the ONLY way

  • Replies 52
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Grizzle Lieutenant

Grizzle

Posted
Posted

quote:
Originally posted by Jaguar:

No we can't, because he caused the main events that allowed 911, he is the one that refused to take Ossama when he was offered to us.

We were punishing Sudan with sanctions because they harbored terrorists. To get Bin Laden those sanctions would have had to have been lifted. WHo knows what would have happened under those circumstances. In retrospect Clinton made the wrong choice. I guess his crystal ball wasn't working then.

quote:

He is the one that started a war, every time one of his illegal actions caused him to be investigated.

And just how many illegal actions did Clinton commit while in office? He lied under oath about an affair with Monica Lewinsky during a trial regarding Paula Jones. I count one. The eight years of other investigations for supposed crimes he commited while in Arkansas resulted in nothing.

quote:

Clinton was a criminal president, he was negligent and treasonous.

Opinion, not fact.

quote:

I hope the man burns.......

I don't like Bush's policies and what has happened to our country since he's been in charge, but I don't hate the man and I certainly don't wish him any harm.

Kalshion LT. Commander

Kalshion

Posted
Posted

quote:
Originally posted by Grizzle:

[QB] And just how many illegal actions did Clinton commit while in office? He lied under oath about an affair with Monica Lewinsky during a trial regarding Paula Jones. I count one. The eight years of other investigations for supposed crimes he commited while in Arkansas resulted in nothing.

More than what can be counted. There's proof everywhere you just need to look for it

quote:
I don't like Bush's policies and what has happened to our country since he's been in charge, but I don't hate the man and I certainly don't wish him any harm.

I love how you tried to twist what Jaguar just said

He was talking about Clinton, NOT bush

quote:
Opinion, not fact.

Fact, cause there's more than enough evidence including his speech where he said he commited such crimes, where were you when he said that? Under you're bed praying he was the greatest president to ever live?

Grizzle Lieutenant

Grizzle

Posted
Posted

quote:
Originally posted by Kalshion:

More than what can be counted. There's proof everywhere you just need to look for it

By all means, don't be afraid to list them.

quote:
I love how you tried to twist what Jaguar just said

He was talking about Clinton, NOT bush

Twist? Let me explain, I was attempting a parallel (obviously not successful)

Jag doesn't like Clinton and wants him to burn because of his actions.

I don't like Bush and his actions, but I leave it at that. No need to go the extra step of lighting him on fire.

quote:

Fact, cause there's more than enough evidence including his speech where he said he commited such crimes, where were you when he said that?

Please, do provide links or other statements to back this up. (Not the Lewinsky crime, but all the others you're alluding to.)

quote:

Under you're bed praying he was the greatest president to ever live?

When did I say that? Please don't put words in my mouth or make absurd assumptions like that.

I'm just trying to balance the scales a little when some of you begin making blanket statements without supporting them.

To quote $ilk

quote:

No examples and no counterpoints... wave the magic Wand of +3 liberal dodging and make a blanket statement without offering some kind of alternative besides apathy and moral relativism.

Steve Schacher Major

Steve Schacher

Posted
Posted

quote:
So I guess in a nutshell, the people who lost family members on 9/11 are only entitled to an opinion if it happens to agree with the Admin.

What you're seeing is the megaphone effect of the media at work.

In reality, the "family members of 9/11" consist of 3 women who have made the rounds of all the TV talk shows, and have been quoted repeatedly by the AP and other news sources in story after story to make it seem like the families of all 3,000 victims are up in arms. The truth is that just as many family members have signed letters stating that they support the President as have gone on television to denounce the president.

What is at issue here is how swift the coordinated attack against these ads appeared. It's clear to me that this was planned well in advance, and that they were just waiting for the first ad to run in order to pounce. If you agree with that assessment, then the real people who politicized 9/11 are the ones who sought out widows and parents of victims, and fed them rehearsed lines prior to the first ads appearing.

quote:
What about the Firemans Association that said pretty much the same thing?

Again, this isn't the Fireman's Association, it is the leader of the Fireman's Association making the statements -- I could point out Fireman Mike Moran as the opposite viewpoint. True, the union has endorsed John Kerry, as most unions do, but the rank and file firemen do not all share this opinion. Again, this is an example of the megaphone effect at work.

Guest BaBaBooey

Guest BaBaBooey

Posted
Posted

Don't you think that if Bush had been revered as a hero by the firemen as in "He gave those bastards PAYBACK", he'd have that union's support? I think what we have are people saying that this guy has done everything to shut down the investigations into 9/11 and moreover a guy that did not extend any real benefits to the families of the firefighters. My beef with 9/11 families is that they unlike any other victims in our society got $1.5 million. I would like to see our WARRIORS treated so well as those that were slain unjustly. Rush digs up Mike Moran (your puppetmaster is showing) and that's taken as gospel? If the union was unhappy and not in league with this decision the union chief would be history.

Anyway... *shrugs*

Steve Schacher Major

Steve Schacher

Posted
Posted

quote:
Clinton was a criminal president, he was negligent and treasonous.

quote:
Opinion, not fact.

Actually, it is fact.

Clinton pleaded guilty to perjury and obstruction of justice, and settled a claim against Paula Jones on his last day in office. Clinton was also disbarred from the Arkansas bar for 10 years, and had his certification to appear before the United States Supreme Court revoked.

[ 03-07-2004, 06:02 PM: Message edited by: Steve Schacher ]

Steve Schacher Major

Steve Schacher

Posted
Posted

quote:
Don't you think that if Bush had been revered as a hero by the firemen as in "He gave those bastards PAYBACK", he'd have that union's support?

No, I don't. The unions vote Democrat, lock, stock, and barrel, no matter what.

The unions supported drilling in ANWR and Bush attempted to pass a bill opening up ANWR to drilling, but the unions still went Democrat. The unions wanted a steel tariff bill and Bush gave them one, but the unions still went Democrat.

quote:
Rush digs up Mike Moran (your puppetmaster is showing) and that's taken as gospel?

Mike Moran was one of the featured speakers at the televised NY celebration of firefighters after 9/11 (the one where Hillary Clinton was booed and VH1 replaced the boos with cheers). I don't need Limbaugh to remind me of who the players are. My memory's just as good as his.

The media dig up Rita Lasar, and that's taken as gospel?

Steve Schacher Major

Steve Schacher

Posted
Posted

Here's a follow-up amateur essay by the same person who wrote the one I posted the other day:

quote:
A follow up to my article on Friday. You'll remember I showed that the "outraged" victims who paraded around the networks this week blasting President Bush's television ads were leaders of a group called Peaceful Tomorrows, a group funded directly by The Tides Center, which is chaired by Teresa Heinz Kerry - wife of Senator John Kerry.

Folks, this story seems to have no end. It appears Mrs. Kerry's organization, The Tides Center receives some of its funding directly from the Open Society Institute & Soros Foundations Network.

You might recognize a name in that organization's title. The "Soros" refers to none other than George Soros, the billionaire entrepreneur. Now you're asking yourself, "why does this matter? So a billionaire is giving money to Mrs. Kerry's organization, which in turns funds a group run by some 9/11 widows who lashed out at President Bush."

Let me refresh your memory about Mr. Soros. "George Soros is founder and chairman of the Open Society Institute and the Soros foundations network. He is also currently the president and chairman of Soros Fund Management LLC, a private investment management firm that serves as principal advisor to the Quantum Group of Funds, a series of international investment vehicles."

In an article in the Washington Post on November 11, 2003, George Soros was quoted as saying, "[defeating President Bush] is the central focus of my life, ... [the 2004 presidential race] is a matter of life and death."

In the same article, Soros is quoted as saying, "Neoconservatives are exploiting the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001."

In a review of Soros' website, (Open Society Institute & Soros Foundations Network), there are a number of donations listed for the Tides Center/Tides Foundation. The sum of those donations (or grants, as the site calls them) is just a little over $10.5 million. (In addition, Soros has given $5 million to Moveon.org).

So while the Left and its minions are calling for the head of our President for campaign ads, which some victims' families say honors the day and the dead, there is a network of organizations waging war against George W. Bush and the Republicans. To recap the web of money and deceit the Left is using to gun for the White House:

1. Victims' families claim outrage over Bush campaign ads and media reports it as the few widows parading around the networks are speaking for all victims' families (while many family members sign an "Open Letter to America" claiming the Bush ads are honorable and respectful.

2. The spokeswomen for the "outraged victims" go on multiple networks and various times in various locations and recite the same lines (referring to "Bush reading to school children on 9/11" and "3,000 murdered on Bush's watch") claiming that Bush is exploiting 9/11 for political gain.

3. The spokeswomen are leaders of a group called Peaceful Tomorrows, and activist group that has protested the war in Iraq and other Bush administration actions.

4. Peaceful Tomorrows is funded by The Tides Center, which is chaired by Teresa Heinz Kerry, wife of John Kerry, political opponent of George W. Bush for the office of President.

5. The Tides Center/Tides Foundation has received more than $10.5 million from the Open Society Institute & Soros Foundations Network, and organization run by George Soros, who is quoted as saying the defeat of President Bush is a matter of life and death as well as claiming Conservatives are exploiting 9/11.

So there you go. It's not a pretty picture. The same group of people who lobbied so hard for campaign finance reform and blamed Republicans for having huge political war chests, are in fact a large network of activist organizations, funneling cash from one to another, in an effort to defeat President Bush. It's a dirty little game, this thing called politics, but it appears the Left has figured out how to master it.... It's going to be a long hard road this year... as we're up against a group who thinks your vote is a matter of life and death. Hold on tight.

Guest BaBaBooey

Guest BaBaBooey

Posted
Posted

Folks? What happened to, "My friends.."?

Grizzle Lieutenant

Grizzle

Posted
Posted

quote:
Originally posted by Steve Schacher:

quote:
Clinton was a criminal president, he was negligent and treasonous.

quote:
Opinion, not fact.

Actually, it is fact.

Clinton pleaded guilty to perjury and obstruction of justice, and settled a claim against Paula Jones on his last day in office. Clinton was also disbarred from the Arkansas bar for 10 years, and had his certification to appear before the United States Supreme Court revoked.

Yes, the criminal part is true. I stand corrected.
Fallout2man Ensign

Fallout2man

Posted
Posted

quote:
Originally posted by $iLk:

quote:
If we really wanted to stop the terrorists, we'd just pull our military out of foreign nations.

So the crux of your argument is that we are somehow responsible for other people's actions and that they would all play nice in their sandbox countries if we'd just do as they ask and stick our head in the sand while they brutally force their view of Islam on the populaces of their countries?

The Crux of my argument is that we shouldnÔÇÖt care how nations play together unless they start directly showing theyÔÇÖre going to attack us. These terrorists want us off of their soil. They wouldn't be attacking us if we weren't there in the first place. Right now it's sort of a catch-22, however if we could actually stop for once trying to shape the world like we wanted it, then perhaps these terrorists wouldn't want so badly to kill us? They seem to primarily hate us because we have a bad habit of installing puppet governments, forcing our way of life on other peoples, and installing brutal dictators in regions just because theyÔÇÖll be buddy-buddy with the US government. If we just pulled back and let them do whatever they wanted, theyÔÇÖd probably stop focusing on us and back to killing themselves.

quote:
Surely terrorist attacks are being prevented if we'd drop the whole 'threatening' Homeland Security and quit beain 'mean' by searching people's luggage at airports.

I talked about pulling our military off of foreign soil. We obviously do need to keep the USA safe on our own soil. However thereÔÇÖs also an obvious limit we have to set. I donÔÇÖt mind luggage searches and metal detectors and the like. I do mind giving the president the power to, on just a single word, declare you an ÔÇ£enemy combatantÔÇØ despite being a citizen, and then hold you in inhumane conditions without a trial or even being formally charged with any crime, without even having to justify why they thought they should.

quote:
quote:
but we'll signifigantly lower the number of people out to do such things.

Right... just like quitting actively pursuing murder suspects will mean less murders overall.

I donÔÇÖt mind pursuing terrorists in our country. I do mind a multi-national witch-hunt where itÔÇÖs us against most of the UN, when we have a much simpler solution right before us. Murder is a domestic issue that we settle domestically.

quote:
Originally posted by Jaguar:

quote:
Originally posted by Fallout2man:

Two wrongs don't make a right. Just because the party you chose uses a despicable tactic doesn't suddenly make it acceptable.

What kind of dreamworld do you live in?

I'm glad that you're not in charge, or we'd have at least 1 terrorist attack a day.

The old "if we leave them alone, They'll leave us alone?"

Yeah Right, what are you 14 or something?

They won't leave us alone, if we had pulled every soldier out of every country, if we had left the Taliban alone, if we had left Saddam alone.

Oh really, so you're saying that Bin Ladden doesn't want our government off of what he considers his soil? Last time I checked that's what he and a large number of these arab terrorists were all after. The military is for protecting us from attack, not "keeping foreign powers in check." If we got our government out and away from theirs, they'd have no reason to come after us.

quote:
If we had said, OK, we were bad, we're sorry we made you angry, we will just pull all our soldiers home.

1: Oil would be $5 a gallon

So we're supposed to dictate the world's oil prices? And most of what we get I do believe comes from Saudi Arabia because of the generous trade agreements we have with the ruling house of Saud (spelling?).

quote:
2: we would have had 10's of thousands of casualties from terrorist attacks.

Really? Last time I checked I was proposing getting us off of our soil, not to stop keeping ours safe. I don't agree with a lot of the patriot act and other such draconian laws, however I do believe in keeping the actual USA secure, while still providing a reasonable right to privacy to its citizens. If anything terror attacks on us would decrease, since they'd have no more of a real reason to go after us.

A lot of these groups just want us to get our government out of their country or "holy lands."

quote:
3: AlQuaeda would have gotten and probably used WMD, gotten from Saddam Housien.

What WMD? While I too originally suspected Saddam to have some sort of secret weapons program, I've yet to see any real evidence of it at all. Even supposing he did, Al Quaeda wouldn't be using them against us, since if we weren't putting our soldiers and government on their lands, they'd have never cared about us at all.

quote:
4:The Terrorist organizations would be 100's of time larger then they are no.

That's a rather broad claim. While one could suppose such a thing may happen, perhaps if the USA hadn't decided to play policeman over the world, the peoples of various nations might be content enough that these organizations wouldn't even have formed in the first place. Yes that's just as broad and something I can't really say would happen, however your claim seems to fall under the same light.

In all honestly, as I said, even if they were, they wouldn't probably care about us at all. We've got a duty to protect our own soil from these things, but that's about it.

quote:
5: The middle east would now be totally the crazy terrorist Islam, instead of the moderately crazy Islam.

Islam isn't in the least crazy, at least not any crazier then Christianity or any other religion. There are some very strict and I would call barbaric practices some countries do preform, however those practices usually arenÔÇÖt actually prescribed by the religion. Just like how the Bible didnÔÇÖt tell the Spanish to go torture/kill everyone who wouldnÔÇÖt convert when they had their inquisition. If we try to force our way of life on them, then that's exactly what's going to cause them to get angry and form these "terrorist organizations." Unless a nation, and that's a key thing, a nation, shows it's going to begin some sort of war that can reasonably be shown to be something that will spill the violence over to the USA, then maybe we should think about getting involved.

quote:
6: We wouldn't be safe ANYWHERE in the United States.

So just because we aren't policing other nations we're suddenly not safe at home? I fail to see the logic in this, we should very much protect the United States, but do that within our borders, with a few small exceptions for times when we have enough proof to believe a nation will attack us (key word here is nation).

quote:
7: Israel would no longer exist

Why should we care if Israel exists or not? If it can't take care of its own then I guess it wasn't a very good nation now was it?

quote:
They hate us because we are not Muslim, they hate us because we are the strongest country on earth.

Really? Show me at least three actual terrorist groups saying that's why they said that. I imagine you couldn't even find one. So far all I've only heard people who are trying to rationalize this campaign of enforcing our culture onto others using that term. If you can honestly find me what can reasonably be considered unbiased proof to the contrary, then I will stand corrected, but as of yet I have seen no such thing.

quote:
They will do whatever is necassary to destroy us.

The only way to insure our security is to destroy them FIRST, and that is what we have been doing and will continue to do.

The way you make it sound, it seems we should just take a bunch of nukes and turn the entire middle-east into a glow-in-the-dark parking lot, because anything short of that and we won't have gotten them all. In fact even then we might not, but thatÔÇÖs about as close to absolute as I can imagine youÔÇÖd ever get.

quote:
If Clinton and his criminal cronies in the Democratic party had not destroyed our intelligence networks, had not gutted our military, had not made sorry with every tinpot dictator and Muslim crazy in the world, we would never have had a 911.

I do agree with you about the gutting the military, I always believe in having a strong force to defend the nation. However honestly a lot of the dictators in various nations we were responsible for putting in place in the first place. To just blame Clinton for everything seems like you're being rather short sighted, these sorts of bad decisions go across many presidents both republican and democrat. The fact is ultimately no one man is responsible for this situation.

quote:
Pull your head out of the sand and come to reality.

These are NOT normal people, these are not people you can make nice with, and give concessions to.

Concessions=weakness, and therefore they will attack us. Look at Israel and the Palestinians for a clue about that.

Last I checked Israel has been having problems with Palestine since it was formed. See there's this whole problem with the Jews and Muslims both claiming certain ground is Holy to their religions, and both of them refuse to stop at anything to reclaim it, due to their equal zealousy for their religions. Israel has through several wars tried to continually expand its land and now is faced with the "terrorists" that are causing its figurative walls to close in. Just look at that ridiculously giant fence they constructed, I doubt that's going to really do much to stop their problems.

quote:
The more you give them, the more they will attack.

You need to figure out what reality is, because your little dreamland will get us all killed.

So why are we going to get killed? First of all, supposing even if they did attack more, we'd have more resources to defend our own soil with. Generally speaking I think the evidence suggests they'll fight with themselves endlessly unless one group manages to kill all the others, then perhaps we'll see. What we're doing is just wasting resources. If we really MUST stop this, then why don't we just nuke the entire middle east back to the stone age? Since after all, if the only way to win is to kill them I guess we should just murder the entire region.

I never disputed that it wouldn't stop terrorists entirely, however they'd probably be too busy focusing on other targets to care about us unless somehow something caused the balance of power to shift and one group managed to maintain control over the entire middle east. Why must we decide what is best for the rest of the world, what gives us the right?

[ 03-08-2004, 06:52 AM: Message edited by: Fallout2man ]

Guest $iLk

Guest $iLk

Posted
Posted

quote:
The Crux of my argument is that we shouldnÔÇÖt care how nations play together unless they start directly showing theyÔÇÖre going to attack us.

Last I checked I was hearing "Jihad!!!", "Allah Akbar!", and "Death to America!" all over Al Jazeera... but are you suggesting we wait until Al Quieda gets all their delegates together and issues a formal "Declaration of War"? I honestly don't give a damn about the "why?" of the matter and me personally - watching the deaths of thousands of my fellow countrymen - the last thing on my mind was trying to understand these bastards and backing our military out. What do you think Bush's approval rating would have been had he taken your tact?

quote:
I talked about pulling our military off of foreign soil. We obviously do need to keep the USA safe on our own soil. However thereÔÇÖs also an obvious limit we have to set. I donÔÇÖt mind luggage searches and metal detectors and the like. I do mind giving the president the power to, on just a single word, declare you an ÔÇ£enemy combatantÔÇØ despite being a citizen, and then hold you in inhumane conditions without a trial or even being formally charged with any crime, without even having to justify why they thought they should.

I agree with you there. Of course that agreement would come to the forefront of anyone who was ensnared in such a thing while the majority of Americans don't give a damn about constitutionality anyway.

quote:
I donÔÇÖt mind pursuing terrorists in our country. I do mind a multi-national witch-hunt where itÔÇÖs us against most of the UN, when we have a much simpler solution right before us.

The U.N. is afraid to take any stand because it is inclusive of those regimes who harbor terrorists as well - thus I don't care what they think, and I'm damn glad Bush doesn't care. I wonder just how much Iraqi money is lining Koffi's pockets... just wondering.

A simpler solution?

Pulling back from all our positions around the world and huddling up inside American borders and bringing up our walls of Xenophobia?

We tried that after World War I... if we didn't have those positions overseas how much of Europe would be speaking Russian/Commie right now?

(come to think of that they are anyways )

quote:
Oh really, so you're saying that Bin Ladden doesn't want our government off of what he considers his soil? Last time I checked that's what he and a large number of these arab terrorists were all after. The military is for protecting us from attack, not "keeping foreign powers in check." If we got our government out and away from theirs, they'd have no reason to come after us.

They are also after opressing countless people through use of force, forcing women to wear burquas, and stoning each other to death.

And how is our military not protecting us from attack? By maintaining a presence in those countries, we also:

A. Give them something else to focus on.

B. Are able to keep an eye on them and respond in a timely fashion when a threat DOES present itself.

quote:
What WMD? While I too originally suspected Saddam to have some sort of secret weapons program, I've yet to see any real evidence of it at all. Even supposing he did, Al Quaeda wouldn't be using them against us, since if we weren't putting our soldiers and government on their lands, they'd have never cared about us at all.

You have to be intellectually 'elite' to be so devoid of rational thinking. And if we did everything you asked - and they still hated us and carried out terrorist attacks on us what would your answer then be?

quote:
Islam isn't in the least crazy, at least not any crazier then Christianity or any other religion.

Last I checked I wasn't strapping dynamite to myself and looking for the nearest bus full of children.

quote:
Unless a nation, and that's a key thing, a nation, shows it's going to begin some sort of war that can reasonably be shown to be something that will spill the violence over to the USA, then maybe we should think about getting involved.

So during World War 2 we should have focused on the Japanese, defeated them, and left Germany well enough alone?

Then all your buddies overseas would at least be pro-military .

quote:
Why should we care if Israel exists or not? If it can't take care of its own then I guess it wasn't a very good nation now was it?

I believe Israel would exist regardless. Personally I would agree with all your provisions if pulling our troops out of the Middle East provided that we also take the leash off of Israel. Then the rest of the Middle East wouldn't exist

quote:
Really? Show me at least three actual terrorist groups saying that's why they said that. I imagine you couldn't even find one. So far all I've only heard people who are trying to rationalize this campaign of enforcing our culture onto others using that term. If you can honestly find me what can reasonably be considered unbiased proof to the contrary, then I will stand corrected, but as of yet I have seen no such thing.

I think it's countless even in their own scriptures that we are defined as 'infidel' and a requirement of their religion is to kill us.

quote:

Properly read, the QuÔÇÖran clearly means death to the West. Death and death again! A thousand deaths! A million! The streets must run red with the blood of the infidel! Then, and only then, shall we become friends.

All Praise the Compassionate,

Oft-Forgiving, Most-Merciful Allah!

ÔÇö Osama bin Laden

And a few verses from the Qu'ran to get this "Religion of Peace" B.S. out of the way:

quote:

God, you are our protector: give us victory therefore over the infidel

nations. 2:286

As for the infidels, their wealth, and their children, shall avail them

nothing against God. 3:8

And if you shall be slain or die on the path of God, then pardon

from God and mercy is better than all your amassings; For if

you die or be slain, verily unto God shall you be gathered. 3:151,2

Let those then fight on the path of God, who barter this present life

for that which is to come; for whoever fights on God's path, whether

he be slain or conquer, we will in the end give him a great reward. 4:77

Verily, the infidels are your undoubted enemies! 4:102

O Beleivers! Take not the Jews or Christians as friends. They are

but one another's friends. If any one of you takes them for his

friends, he surely is one of them! 5:56

Fight then against them until strife be at an end, and the religion be all

of it God's. 8:40

And when the sacred months are passed,
kill those who join other gods

with God wherever you shall find them; and seize them, besiege them,

and lay wait for them with every kind of ambush:
but if they shall convert,

and observe prayer, and pay the obligatory alms, then let them go their

way. 9:5

Make war upon such of those to whom the Scriptures have been given as

believe not in God, or in the last day, and who forbid not that which God

and His Apostle have forbidden, and who profess not the profession of the

truth. 9:29

Believers! wage war against such of the infidels as are your neighbors, and let them find you rigorous. 9:124

Give not way therefore to the Infidels, but by means ot this Koran strive

against them with a mighty strife. 25:54

So simply take any random 3 terrorist groups who believe in Islam and your challenge is met.

quote:
The way you make it sound, it seems we should just take a bunch of nukes and turn the entire middle-east into a glow-in-the-dark parking lot, because anything short of that and we won't have gotten them all. In fact even then we might not, but thatÔÇÖs about as close to absolute as I can imagine youÔÇÖd ever get.

IDEA!!!

quote:
Israel has through several wars tried to continually expand its land and now is faced with the "terrorists" that are causing its figurative walls to close in. Just look at that ridiculously giant fence they constructed, I doubt that's going to really do much to stop their problems.

As I recall it was Israel who was attacked and in so defending themselves aquired land which they did not relinquish which is their right.

Guest

Guest

Posted
Posted

quote:
Originally posted by Fallout2man:

The Crux of my argument is that we shouldnÔÇÖt care how nations play together unless they start directly showing theyÔÇÖre going to attack us. These terrorists want us off of their soil. They wouldn't be attacking us if we weren't there in the first place. Right now it's sort of a catch-22, however if we could actually stop for once trying to shape the world like we wanted it, then perhaps these terrorists wouldn't want so badly to kill us? They seem to primarily hate us because we have a bad habit of installing puppet governments, forcing our way of life on other peoples, and installing brutal dictators in regions just because theyÔÇÖll be buddy-buddy with the US government. If we just pulled back and let them do whatever they wanted, theyÔÇÖd probably stop focusing on us and back to killing themselves.

Wrongo, but's that OK, you know nothing about international relations, treaty obligations, and international security.

quote:
I talked about pulling our military off of foreign soil. We obviously do need to keep the USA safe on our own soil. However thereÔÇÖs also an obvious limit we have to set. I donÔÇÖt mind luggage searches and metal detectors and the like. I do mind giving the president the power to, on just a single word, declare you an ÔÇ£enemy combatantÔÇØ despite being a citizen, and then hold you in inhumane conditions without a trial or even being formally charged with any crime, without even having to justify why they thought they should.

Oh puhlease, there are NO US citizens that have been declared enemy combatants and then held without trial. And Enemy combatants that ARE NOT US citizens are NOT protected under the US Constitution, they are protected under the Geneva conventions, and most if not all are living in conditions that are thousands of times better then when they were terrorists.

quote:
I donÔÇÖt mind pursuing terrorists in our country. I do mind a multi-national witch-hunt where itÔÇÖs us against most of the UN, when we have a much simpler solution right before us. Murder is a domestic issue that we settle domestically.

Woohoo, now that's a punishment, it's not war, it's murder, therefore you should be caught and brought to trial. Sorry, you are an enemy soldier, be it a terrorist organization or an anemy country, and you should be dealt with accordingly. As in bring as much military might and power down upon you so that you either Give up and go home, or die, hopefully the latter.

quote:
Oh really, so you're saying that Bin Ladden doesn't want our government off of what he considers his soil? Last time I checked that's what he and a large number of these arab terrorists were all after. The military is for protecting us from attack, not "keeping foreign powers in check." If we got our government out and away from theirs, they'd have no reason to come after us.

BS, have you never heard us called the great Satan, do you know why that is? Because 1:We are a democracy, which goes against ALL Shia Muslim law, and 2:We give every woman equal rights, which again is against Shia law, and 3: We have the temerity and gaul to allow other religions besides Muslim to practice in our country.

We are a target, NO matter what we did, your naivete is stunning....

quote:
So we're supposed to dictate the world's oil prices? And most of what we get I do believe comes from Saudi Arabia because of the generous trade agreements we have with the ruling house of Saud (spelling?).

You didn't live through the oil crisis of the 70's did you? If we did not support militarily the House of Saud, that house would fall, a muslim government would take it's place, think Iran, and that would be the end of the oil. Do you have any idea how much the US depends on oil for it's economy. You may not like it, but it's a fact of life. House of Saud=inexpensive oil, no house of saud=NO OIL.....

quote:
Really? Last time I checked I was proposing getting us off of our
I assume you meant off foreign soil
soil, not to stop keeping ours safe. I don't agree with a lot of the patriot act and other such draconian laws, however I do believe in keeping the actual USA secure, while still providing a reasonable right to privacy to its citizens. If anything terror attacks on us would decrease, since they'd have no more of a real reason to go after us.

A lot of these groups just want us to get our government out of their country or "holy lands."

Oh puhlease, come on, are you really this naive? Iraq was the MAJOR financier of terrorist groups around the world, Saddam had WMD's, and he had UN sanctions against him because of his nose thumbing of the UN. We were in Saudi Arabia per their request, to defend them against Iraqi aggression. If a few whackos want us gone, well too fricking bad, we were there under invitation. If we took a vote, and a minority decided that your house was needed for the poor, would that be OK with you? Would it be OK, if a minority, say of 5% decided that your house was needed, and they were going to take it?

That is the way it is with these terrorists, they want us gone so that they can topple the house of saud and take over the country with their crazy militant Islam. It's like a minority telling the police that they should just leave so that they can take your house from you.

Difference is, if the house of Saud falls, so does the US economy, why do you think we wanted to drill in ANWAR?

quote:
What WMD? While I too originally suspected Saddam to have some sort of secret weapons program, I've yet to see any real evidence of it at all. Even supposing he did, Al Quaeda wouldn't be using them against us, since if we weren't putting our soldiers and government on their lands, they'd have never cared about us at all.

Again, you have no clues as to our treaty obligations, agreements, nor international security. Your naivete is astounding.

quote:
That's a rather broad claim. While one could suppose such a thing may happen, perhaps if the USA hadn't decided to play policeman over the world, the peoples of various nations might be content enough that these organizations wouldn't even have formed in the first place. Yes that's just as broad and something I can't really say would happen, however your claim seems to fall under the same light.

In all honestly, as I said, even if they were, they wouldn't probably care about us at all. We've got a duty to protect our own soil from these things, but that's about it.

Again, your total lack of understanding of our economy, how it works and why peace in the Middle East, which would NEVER happen without our intervention, is again, astounding.

I am just blown away at how clueless you are.

quote:
Islam isn't in the least crazy, at least not any crazier then Christianity or any other religion. There are some very strict and I would call barbaric practices some countries do preform, however those practices usually arenÔÇÖt actually prescribed by the religion. Just like how the Bible didnÔÇÖt tell the Spanish to go torture/kill everyone who wouldnÔÇÖt convert when they had their inquisition. If we try to force our way of life on them, then that's exactly what's going to cause them to get angry and form these "terrorist organizations." Unless a nation, and that's a key thing, a nation, shows it's going to begin some sort of war that can reasonably be shown to be something that will spill the violence over to the USA, then maybe we should think about getting involved.

Please, please, please, do not give Islam and Muslim the same moral foundation as Christianity, and do not bring up past wrongs of Christianity to somehow excuse the current wrongs done by the muslim religion.

No doubt in my mind, you live in California and were publicly schooled in that state.

quote:
So just because we aren't policing other nations we're suddenly not safe at home? I fail to see the logic in this, we should very much protect the United States, but do that within our borders, with a few small exceptions for times when we have enough proof to believe a nation will attack us (key word here is nation).

Again, your naivete is incredible. What? Are we gonna use our military to police for terrorists on our own soil? Ever heard of the Posse Commitus act? Probably not, if our military were not over there fighting these terrorists, we and our police would be fighting them here, because the military is powerless to help the police in this country.

Sorry, we have international oblisgations, and it is to our economic advantage to make sure that oil etc continues to flow and does not fall into the hands of Muslim extremists, If that occurred, the US would be in more trouble then if we were attacked, and we would be, whether we were in those countries or not.

quote:
why should we care if Israel exists or not? If it can't take care of its own then I guess it wasn't a very good nation now was it?

Now you're just acting stupid, I can't believe that you had temerity and the idiocy to make such a statement. Israel is the ONLY democracy in that part of the world. The muslims don't care about the holy land and all that garbage, a democracy in their midst is more then they can bare, THAT is what they hate. A powerful democracy, that outproduces them by thousands of percentage points, enrages them. Israel is blamed for it's prosperity because it somehow made it so the Muslims have nothing...WRONG!!!

quote:
Really? Show me at least three actual terrorist groups saying that's why they said that. I imagine you couldn't even find one. So far all I've only heard people who are trying to rationalize this campaign of enforcing our culture onto others using that term. If you can honestly find me what can reasonably be considered unbiased proof to the contrary, then I will stand corrected, but as of yet I have seen no such thing.

Again, oh Puhlease, your ignorance and naivete is incedible, and if you actually believe that there are not terrorist organizations that would not enjoy DESTROYING the US, the largest democracy and most powerful nation on earth, then you are closing your eyes and covering your ears.

quote:
The way you make it sound, it seems we should just take a bunch of nukes and turn the entire middle-east into a glow-in-the-dark parking lot, because anything short of that and we won't have gotten them all. In fact even then we might not, but thatÔÇÖs about as close to absolute as I can imagine youÔÇÖd ever get.

Oh please, now you are just talking nonsense, if we prove to the terrorists that every time they pop their heads out of their little holes that we will blow it off, pretty soon there won't be anymore terrorists. Every time a company or organization is caught financing a terrorist group, all it's money is taken and the organization shut down and it's leader imprisoned, pretty soon there won't be any terrorist, can't fight a war without money.

Again, you lack of any understanding of how the world works is stunning.

quote:
I do agree with you about the gutting the military, I always believe in having a strong force to defend the nation. However honestly a lot of the dictators in various nations we were responsible for putting in place in the first place. To just blame Clinton for everything seems like you're being rather short sighted, these sorts of bad decisions go across many presidents both republican and democrat. The fact is ultimately no one man is responsible for this situation.

This we can agree on somewhat, but Clintons stint in the whitehouse and actions showed the terrorists that they could get away with attacking us without reprisals and that we would run, therefore, terrorism WORKED, because our president was a coward, and would get out of any country that the terrorists attacked us in. Therefore 911, it was thought, would force us to remove all our military from all over the world, and give them free riegn to take over and overthrow whatever country they wanted.

911 was DIRECTLY Clintons fault because of ALL the signals that he gave Al Quaeda that we were weak kneed and lily livered. Clinton is DIRECTLY repsonsible. And you of course would just love to compound that same attitude.

quote:
Last I checked Israel has been having problems with Palestine since it was formed. See there's this whole problem with the Jews and Muslims both claiming certain ground is Holy to their religions, and both of them refuse to stop at anything to reclaim it, due to their equal zealousy for their religions. Israel has through several wars tried to continually expand its land and now is faced with the "terrorists" that are causing its figurative walls to close in. Just look at that ridiculously giant fence they constructed, I doubt that's going to really do much to stop their problems.

Your simplistic view of Israel and the Middle east and the palestinians is astounding. You have no knowledge of the history or what actually happened to create the situation you now see.

quote:
So why are we going to get killed? First of all, supposing even if they did attack more, we'd have more resources to defend our own soil with. Generally speaking I think the evidence suggests they'll fight with themselves endlessly unless one group manages to kill all the others, then perhaps we'll see. What we're doing is just wasting resources. If we really
MUST
stop this, then why don't we just nuke the entire middle east back to the stone age? Since after all, if the only way to win is to kill them I guess we should just murder the entire region.

I never disputed that it wouldn't stop terrorists entirely, however they'd probably be too busy focusing on other targets to care about us unless somehow something caused the balance of power to shift and one group managed to maintain control over the entire middle east. Why must we decide what is best for the rest of the world, what gives us the right?

We must decide what is best for our own interests, and stopping terrorism is in ouur best interest. Somewhat of a reliable and peaceful middle east is also in our best interest, making sure that the oil flows cheaply and reliably is also in our best interest, to make more countries a democracy are also in our best interest.

We MUST watch out for what is in our best interest internationally, so that we may profit and remain what and who we are. It is in our best interest to play world policeman, no matter how much I personallly dislike it, but it is the only thing that makes sense at this point in time.

It is a necessity, or else we will no longer be a superpower, we will become a third world country.

Again, your naivete and total lack of understanding of how international relations effects our security and economy, is amazing.

If we did ALL the things you just stated, we would be cutting our own throats and destroying our country and economy. Then you would be screaming how it was all Bushes fault that half the country was out of work, oil cost $5 a gallon, and terrorists were killing our civilians EVERY day on our own soil.

That is EXACTLY what would occur under your naive little plan there. EXACTLY what would happen.

You need to think of long term, instead of short term, because long term is what counts.

You are part of this RIGHT NOW generation, and do not get, what it is and why it is, we are doing what we are doing.

You need to study up kiddo.....

TheRedComet Ensign

TheRedComet

Posted
Posted

quote:
Israel has through several wars tried to continually expand its land and now is faced with the "terrorists" that are causing its figurative walls to close in. Just look at that ridiculously giant fence they constructed, I doubt that's going to really do much to stop their problems.

now where did you get that load of BS? every war in the last 50 years was started by the arab nations .1948- right after the UN's vote regarding israel was accpeted most frightning moment in my country's history an army of barely trained farmers with one airplane as an airforce and trucks as the armor corps against 5 trained armies and a volunteers legion ,1958- not mainly on Israeli soil but started after egypt seized the UN held sinai which worried nations like the UK and france which came to our aid hence the name "operation musketeer" , 1967- ok we've started this one but tell me enemy armor and missile launchers near you border heck all borders.. it's better to act then react , 1973- this little thing a soviet idea attacking us on a holiday in which most of the country is almost shut down almost a loss for our forces but victory came.. with a price 10,000 dead for them and 2,000 for us well my point being they've attacked us we kicked their asses again and again now is that a crime? if a bully pesters a kid and then the kid hits back hard why would you stand up for the bully? but your right about the fence it's a total waste of good tax money i say one big operation to wipe those war mongering SOB's off the face of the earth and if the palstinians want to talk about a nation they should do what we did , they should try developing the land they already have and request nicely from the UN regarding this believe it's easier and cheaper then stock pilling weapons (arafat himself has 4 billion dollors in various foreign accounts the wifey in paris gets 100,000$ each month she gotta eat right? and the palstinian people? they can take care of themselves apperently heh) a bit off topic but this topic seems a spin off of just about every political issue anyway.

Guest $iLk

Guest $iLk

Posted
Posted

Back on Topic.

Copied from: EIB Interview with Rush

Interview with Mike Moran. The Firefighter who said this gem back in 2001:

Moran:"Alls I can say on behalf of my brother John and the 12 members from Ladder 3 that we've lost, the 20 members of the New York City fire department football team that we've lost, and all the people from my neighborhood, my hometown, Rockaway Beach, Queens, New York. Our friends, our neighbors, our relatives, they are not gone, because they are not forgotten. And I want to say one more thing. In the spirit of the Irish people. Osama bin Laden, you can kiss my royal Irish ass! And I live in Rockaway, and this is my face, b---h."

He is asked about how he feels about George Bush's Television ads:

quote:

RUSH: Now we go to the Mike Moran, whose voice you heard mere moments ago. His brother, John Moran, a firefighter in New York was killed in 9/11. Mike, welcome back! It's great to talk to you.

MORAN: Great to talk to you, Rush.

RUSH: So tell me, what do you think of this controversy and how is it affecting you?

MORAN: I'm on vacation. I was home yesterday listening to the radio and start to hear the attacks. I saw the ads. I think they're inspirational. They remind me of going back, like how lost I felt right after 9/11 and then seeing on the news when George Bush went down to the Trade Center, put his arm around the firemen, the words he spoke of... I don't know if "defiance" is the right word, but they were inspirational. They made me feel like, "Wow, this isn't just going to be another terrorist attack that we're going to sit back on our asses -- excuse me -- and do nothing," and for these people to attack these ads, it's nothing less than slimy. There's a lot of things I disagree with with the families, the victims, of the way things have to be done, that the World Trade Center has to remain like an empty pit. I don't agree with that. I think we should build them bigger, the same way, because by not building them back I believe they've won. Our enemies have won. And if we build something defiant, then we're telling them, "All right, let's see you knock these ones down." I don't know --

RUSH: No, I hear you. I understand totally. You have all these different designs, and I think what you're referring to is that many of the family members want a giant memorial right there at Ground Zero on the footprints --

MORAN: Yeah.

RUSH: -- of the Twin Towers, and some people think that's maudlin, that, as you say, terrorists win. What we ought to do is. My take back then was we don't even need a holiday on that day because theme these people were going to work. It was a normal day for them and the terrorism and the attacks not only stopped them from working, they stopped an American election taking place that day in certain states, and they also used our own planes to kill us. And I've always thought that what we need to do is honor those people doing what they were doing, and that is going to work --

MORAN: Yes.

RUSH: -- being Americans, and that would dovetail nicely with your suggestion: rebuild the Towers maybe even taller.

MORAN: Yes.

RUSH: What about --

MORAN: I thought you had said it once. Name one tower Mecca and name one Medina, and as long as those towers are standing, those cities will stand.

RUSH: (laughing) Mecca and Medina. I can't claim credit for... Maybe I did. I don't remember what all I say on this program, it sounds like something I would say. (Moran laughing) But, Mike, you were there, you lost your brother --

MORAN: Yes.

RUSH: -- in the rescue effort, and that's -- you know, we talked to you shortly after all this happened, you had also -- refresh our memory, what was it -- Hillary Clinton was at this rally where we just played you --

MORAN: At the concert for New York, yes.

RUSH: She was booed there; is that right?

MORAN: Oh, yeah, it was -- she was booed pretty good. I mean --

RUSH: Why was that -- my memory, why was she booed?

MORAN:
I mean what I told you on the radio at that time is that people didn't want to hear her, that feel-good, touchy-feely just insane words that don't really mean anything.

RUSH: It was a solemn moment and people were trying to politicize it, and some people that, you know, weren't thought to be genuine about it.

MORAN: Yeah.

RUSH: Well, as you hear this whole Democrat series of talking points, that we ought not even bring this up as part of the campaign, how does it make you feel as somebody who lost a family member there, and were part of the rescue effort yourself?

MORAN: Alls I can think, "How slimy can you get?" It makes -- offense. The big thing that was being written in the dust in the windows, putting on the bumper stickers, was that "We Will Never Forget." And not only has John Kerry and all these people seem to have forgotten already, but they don't want any images shown that will remind you. And if I can tell you, like the talking points that those people hit about the president reading to the school children. I mean when I think back about that, when the guy whispered in his ear and gave him the news and Bush had that stony look on his face? You do not want to play poker with that man. I mean, talk about resolve and discipline to not frighten those kids and to not panic. It was inspirational.

RUSH: And that's why I think this series of reminder ads is strong. Because, you know, this is a dichotomy. People want to forget it but they want to remember it. They want to forget the feeling of horror but they don't want to forget what it meant, what it caused, and what it signals us to. And it seems Democrats are just out there demanding that Bush not even bring this up, that it's not worthy of a campaign, which I addressed moments ago. What do you think about the firefighters union supporting and endorsing Kerry? How do you feel about that?

MORAN: I tell you, I know I've heard you say a number of times. I think it's one of the most classic cases of, you know, the unions collect the dues and they kind of go their own way. You know, there's no polling of the members who they think they should support. I know who I'd support. I see that guy, the president of the International Association of Firefighters, he's on the stage right next to Kerry every time. I don't care if it gets me in trouble. I disagree. The only way those guys will have died in vain, all those firemen. The firemen and all those civilians and the cops, they were the first soldiers that fell on this War on Terror, and the soldiers that we lost subsequently in Afghanistan and Iraq, the only way all those people's lives were lost in vain is if we turn around now, John Kerry becomes president and we turn around to France and UN and we have to kowtow to everything the international community says, and then we let things slide back to the hell it was over there before we took over.

RUSH: Can't add much more to that. That's right on the money. How are you doing now, Mike?

MORAN: I'm doing very good, Rush. I'm married, very happily married and, you know, working and we have a lot of great young guys in the firehouse, and...

RUSH: So you're still firemen? You're still there fighting the blazes?

MORAN: Oh, yep. Yep. No, I mean, alls I can tell you is, "How could you ever leave while the country was still under threat?"

RUSH: Well, that's incredible. I know you guys are called New York's Bravest, and there's a reason for it. I'm honored that you called us today, Mike. It's great to hear from you, man.

MORAN: Rush, I love you. If I couldn't hear you pointing out these things and verbalizing the initial rage that... Even my wife came home yesterday. She was listening in the car, and if I couldn't hear you verbalize these feelings for me first, I would lose my mind.

RUSH: I don't want that to happen, you got too great a mind. (Moran laughing) Thanks very much. Keep using it, Mike.

MORAN: Rush, thank you very much.

RUSH: Nice to talk to you. Mike Moran, New York firefighter.

LostInSpace Commander

LostInSpace

Posted
  • Author
Posted

It's never good news, for instance, for an aspiring senator, such as Hillary Clinton, to have one's spouse branded a law breaker (yet again, in Bill Clinton's case) in the middle of your campaign. But it's even worse when the law breaking in question has your own fingerprints all over it.

Clinton's Call for 'Rule of Law' in Elian Case No Laughing Matter

"The Clinton Rap Sheet" .

And this is just a small sample.

Also just to be fair here is the BUSH DUI issue covered by CBS news on the last election CBS: Rap Sheet Blues

Guest

Guest

Posted
Posted

quote:
Originally posted by Race Bannon IV:

Speaking of criminal Presidents, wasnt Bush arrested for DUI?

Hmm, Bush, DUI when he was in his 20's. Clinton, lying under oath and perjury while president.

Yeah, that compares......NOT....

Sorry Race, but that just don't compute, and is not at all comparable.

And that is not mentioning the other treasonous and criminal actions taken by Clinton while he was Governor of Arkansas, Rape comes to mind rather handily, and while he was President. Taking illegal campaign contributions, giving the Chinese secret military technology for those same campaign contributions etc, etc, etc, ad nauseum.

Guest Fox__Trot

Guest Fox__Trot

Posted
Posted

No matter WHAT bush does in the end his legacy WILL be 9/11 simple as that it makes his campagin the RIGHT campagin for him its EXACTLY the ads they need to run

Honestly I do not give a flip who wins the election and who starts flinging dirty ads first put simply I gave up caring when I was 14 and lifes been alot easier since...

First guy who comes out and says there going to expell every damn illegal alien in this country gets my vote... the words ILLEGAL people

End statement

to be on topic yes bush should use 9/11 images in his ad campagin if on election day he decides to go and run the ENTIRE incident all 4+ hours of it fine I say... as long as there are no voice overs - perhaps in a documentry type fashion... and then end it with a campagin piece thats fine by me

put simply I think people need to rember EXACTLY why US troops are in iraq and rember whose training these terrorists and whose funding them

Charles Lindsey Commander

Charles Lindsey

Posted
Posted

From a New York Times article displayed in AOL news. No link since it would be useless to most of you.

quote:
Nearly two-thirds of respondents said it was unacceptable for candidates to use images from the World Trade Center's destruction in political advertisements. Mr. Bush is running an advertisement that shows the aftermath of the attack on Sept. 11, 2001, and has refused to take it off the air in the face of criticism by Mr. Kerry's allies, firefighters and some families of victims.

quote:
The nationwide telephone poll of 1,206 adults, including 984 registered voters, was taken from last Wednesday through Sunday. It has a margin of sampling error of plus or minus three percentage points.

Seems a low number for a poll.

Personally I don't think he should. He may speak of it all he wants and what he did after or during the event but images should be off limits.

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
 Share
Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...