Home » The PARIS Forums » PARIS: Main » OT: Springtime in Islamberg.
|
|
| Re: OT: Springtime in Islamberg. [message #84862 is a reply to message #84793] |
Sun, 20 May 2007 18:47   |
Rich Lamanna
Messages: 316
Registered: February 2006
|
Senior Member |
|
|
> To react to that, to conduct a "War Against Terrorism" is
> about as desperate and pathetic IMHO.
Bill, it's not a war against terrorism, this is a misnomer. It is a war
against "Radical Islamic Extremism" and their desire to impose an Islamic
theocratic caliphate on the free world.
> And it's so uncreative and historically repetitive as to be a big dumb
> bore.
We defeated Japan and Germany and they're not the worst allies. Come to
think of it, we bailed out the French in WW2 and what the hell did we get in
return, Chirac? Maybe now, however, with Nicolas Sarkozy we'll be better
thought of.
Rich
'Any 20 year-old who isn't a liberal doesn't have a heart,
and any 40 year-old who isn't a conservative doesn't have a brain.' -
Winston Churchill
"Bill L" <bill@billlorentzen.com> wrote in message news:464e6433@linux...
> It was too early when I wrote that.
>
> Look, it's a thorny issue. The point I was trying to make is I support
> the freedom of those religions that grant others the same freedom. I
> don't support freedom of a religion that is trying to curtail freedom,
> you dig?
>
> We have to take responsibility for mis-guided people just the way one
> does for a child. With a small child, you don't get angry and punish him
> or her for making a bad choice. You exert calm, confident control and
> direct it towards the right choice. We have to be bigger than them, and
> not react angrily to their desperate attempts to cause an effect on us.
> Think how pathetically desperate a group must be if the only way they
> can dream up to communicate is through terrorism. That is quite
> pathetic.>
Just think how much more effective and creative it would have been
> to spend a few billion dollars to simply buy access to the terrorists
> and then put them away. Very little collateral damage. The people who
> stand up for freedom by denouncing the terrorists get rich as they
> deserve for their bravery and everybody else lives happier, free-er lives.
>
> I know some will say it would never work like that, but did anyone ever
try?
>
> Bill
>
>
> Rich Lamanna wrote:
> > Bill, I have no problem with freedom, you infidel :-) I am a
> > constitutionalist and believe strongly in the 1st amendment.
Unfortunately
> > the radical Islamic doesn't cherish those same freedoms you and I hold
> > dearly. They are willing to die to impose their fascism and intolerant
> > theocratic rubbish upon us.
> >
> > Remember Waco. The ATF, under the administration of Clinton and Janet
> > Sterno, stormed the Branch Davidian home, in Rambo fashion, to serve a
> > search warrant issued on the suspicion that the group was stockpiling
> > automatic weapons, massacring almost 100 hundred men, women, and
children.
> > But I doubt that the FBI or ATF would ever raid these holy men, oh God
no,
> > despite the fact that they are irrefutably armed to the teeth and
practicing
> > for violent Jihad.
> >
> > Did you read the article dude? Did you read the part about the violent
> > incidents involving Jamaat Ul Fuora in the US?
> > "By 2004 federal investigators uncovered evidence that linked both the
DC
> > "sniper killer" John Allen Muhammed and "Shoe Bomber" Richard Reid to
the
> > group and reports surfaced that Wall Street Journal reporter Daniel
Pearl
> > was captured and beheaded in the process of attempting to obtain an
> > interview with Sheikh Gilani in Pakistan."
> >
> > http://www.canadafreepress.com/images/paul-williams-map-larg e.jpg
> >
> > What were Koresh and the Davidians guilty of? Maybe of being Christians.
> > Nothing compared to this group. Wake up man, this is not about freedom
of
> > religion this is about a Jihad threatening our existence and the choice
to
> > exercise any freedoms let alone freedom of religion. We had better keep
an
> > eye on these guys.
> >
> > Rich
> >
> > From my cold dead hands - Charlton Heston
> >
> >
> > "Bill L" <bill@billlorentzen.com> wrote in message
news:464d8d4f@linux...
> >> I strongly support freedom, especially freedom of religion. Part of
> >> religious freedom is the freedom of religious choice.
> >>
> >> A religion worthy of freedom would increase individual freedom.
> >>
> >> With freedom comes increased responsibility; with increased
> >> responsibility comes increased freedom. By increasing freedoms for all
> >> one's own freedoms are increased.
> >>
> >> “Constant and continual alertness is the price of freedom.
> >> Constant willingness to fight back is the price of freedom.
> >> There is no other price actually.”
> >> — L. RON HUBBARD
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> Rich Lamanna wrote:
> >>> You can thank me for lighting the fire, you can all fan the flames.
Why
> > the
> >>> heck not welcome some more illegals.
> >>>
> >>> http://www.canadafreepress.com/2007/paul-williams051107.htm
> >>>
> >>> "Eternal vigilance is the price of liberty." -- Wendell Phillips
> >>>
> >>> "No man is entitled to the blessings of freedom unless he be vigilant
in
> > its
> >>> preservation." -- General Douglas MacArthur
> >>>
> >>> "FREEDOM IS NOT FOR THE TIMID." -- posted as an announcement outside a
> >>> Unitarian Church in Texas on Sept. 17, 2001
> >>>
> >>> "In the beginning of a change the patriot is a scarce man, and brave,
> > and
> >>> hated
> >>> and scorned. When his cause succeeds, the timid join him, for then it
> > costs
> >>> nothing
> >>> to be a patriot." -- Mark Twain
> >>>
> >>> "History does not long entrust the care of freedom to the weak or the
> >>> timid."
> >>> -- Dwight D. Eisenhower, First Inaugural Address, Jan. 20, 1953
> >>>
> >>> "The future doesn't belong to the faint-hearted. It belongs to the
> > brave."
> >>> -- Ronald Reagan
> >>>
> >>> "The battle, sir, is not to the strong alone; it is to the vigilant,
the
> >>> active,
> >>> the brave." -- Patrick Henry
> >>>
> >>> "The land of the free will cease to be when it's no longer the home of
> >>> the brave."-- Rick Gaber
> >>>
> >>> "Any 20 year-old who isn't a liberal doesn't have a heart,
> >>> and any 40 year-old who isn't a conservative doesn't have a brain." --
> >>> Winston Churchill
> >>>
> >>> Guidance,
> >>> Rich
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >
> >
|
|
|
|
| Re: OT: Springtime in Islamberg. [message #84864 is a reply to message #84777] |
Sun, 20 May 2007 19:02 |
Rich Lamanna
Messages: 316
Registered: February 2006
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Deej, Koresh should have gotten a gig and went on the road, would have saved
him a barrel of trouble. Someone comes to my house and shoots my pups
there's gonna be hell to pay. We're all goin' down.
Rich
'Any 20 year-old who isn't a liberal doesn't have a heart,
and any 40 year-old who isn't a conservative doesn't have a brain.'
- Winston Churchill
"DJ" <www.aarrrrggghhh!!!.com> wrote in message news:464de593$1@linux...
> Hey Paul,
>
> Here's a little something to think about.
>
> http://www.serendipity.li/waco/moore1.html
>
> One of my good friends went to high school with Vernon Howell (a/k/a David
> Koresh). My friend was a great guitar player, and Vernon was always
hanging
> out with him trying to cop some licks. They weren't really good friends or
> anything but fairly well acquainted and my friend said that he wasn't some
> demonic wanker or anything like that.
>
> there's lots of wacko's in Waco.......it's home to Baylor University and
> Jessica/Ashley Simpson fer chrissake!!! Some of my family members attended
> Baylor and they are now liberal Democrat lawyers so I can attest to the
> wacko factor.
>
> Now if a bunch of guys came up to your door in black stormtrooper uniforms
> and the first thing they did was shoot your dog, and the second thing they
> did was shoot you and a member of your family........would you be disposed
> to just let them in?
>
> Not me dude.
>
> Regards,
>
> Deej
>
>
>
> "Paul Artola" <artola@comcast.net> wrote in message
> news:bmmr43paj5r0d5b6kgbqtd25mmhstnsh2m@4ax.com...
> > If he was so innocent, why did he feel compelled to shoot at the Feds
> > when they came to arrest him and kill 4 of them. Paranoia? That logic
> > would turn Paris Hilton into Bonnie Parker!
> >
> > Should we assume everyone massing a stockpile of weapons is only a
> > danger to himself and not potentially to society?
> >
> > - Paul
> >
> > On Fri, 18 May 2007 11:57:29 -0500, "Rich Lamanna"
> > <richard.lamanna@verizon.net> wrote:
> >
> >>Paul, I beg to differ with you. Really you've got to be kidding,
> >>justifying
> >>and rationalizing the actions that Sterno and the Clintonistas taken
here.
> >>This incident could have been averted. I agree Koresh was a whack job,
but
> >>Christian or otherwise, what were they guilty of, they weren't bothering
> >>anyone and they were legally authorized to trade arms, though it
appeared
> >>that they weren't following protocol. To get back to the point, Koresh
> >>hadn't threatened anyone, he may have been a danger to himself and the
> >>others in the compound but unlike the huge network of Jihadists all over
> >>the
> >>world today, Koresh was a lone nut job.
> >>
> >>Rich
> >>
> >>
> >>"Paul Artola" <artola@comcast.net> wrote in message
> >>news:1rbr43djm2h7j63n2tvhtbbdedq08rj0b8@4ax.com...
> >>> Rich -
> >>>
> >>> Considering the events that ensued, I think the Feds' suspicions were
> >>> correct. Interesting that you put the entire blame on the Feds for the
> >>> final result. I, for one, am glad that Koresh and his collection of
> >>> whackjobs are closer to God now, though it is a shame that THEY choose
> >>> to take many innocents with them.
> >>>
> >>> Calling the Davidians Christians is like calling GWB eloquent.
> >>>
> >>> - Paul Artola
> >>> Ellicott City, Maryland
> >>>
> >>> On Fri, 18 May 2007 08:51:46 -0500, "Rich Lamanna"
> >>> <richard.lamanna@verizon.net> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> >Remember Waco. The ATF, under the administration of Clinton and Janet
> >>> >Sterno, stormed the Branch Davidian home, in Rambo fashion, to serve
a
> >>> >search warrant issued on the suspicion that the group was stockpiling
> >>> >automatic weapons, massacring almost 100 hundred men, women, and
> >>children.
> >>> >But I doubt that the FBI or ATF would ever raid these holy men, oh
God
> >>no,
> >>> >despite the fact that they are irrefutably armed to the teeth and
> >>practicing
> >>> >for violent Jihad.
> >>>
> >>> (snip)
> >>>
> >>> >
> >>> >What were Koresh and the Davidians guilty of? Maybe of being
> >>> >Christians.
> >>>
> >>> (snip)
> >>>
> >>> >
> >>> >Rich
> >>> >
> >>>
> >>
> >
>
>
|
|
|
|
| Re: Springtime in Islamberg. [message #84865 is a reply to message #84772] |
Sun, 20 May 2007 19:03 |
Rich Lamanna
Messages: 316
Registered: February 2006
|
Senior Member |
|
|
This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
------=_NextPart_000_005F_01C79B22.57761BE0
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Good point! As you say, go figure.
Rich
"DJ" <www.aarrrrggghhh!!!.com> wrote in message news:464ddbf0@linux...
The thing that has always intrigued me is how the folks on the far =
left in this country slag the only administration that is willing to =
fight for their right to slag the administration. The =
leftleaning/outspoken first amendment loving folks will be the first to =
be slaughtered by those that they are tacitly assisting in defeating the =
policies of this administration.
go figure.
;o}
"Rich Lamanna" <richard.lamanna@verizon.net> wrote in message =
news:464dc9f4@linux...
Deej, Interesting article by Fred Halliday, well written. It =
astounds me at how the left continues to justify and make excuses for =
Islamic extremist violence and fascism while at the same time condemn =
those democratic and freedom loving people, who reserve the right to =
defend themselves against such attacks.
Rich
"DJ" <www.aarrrrggghhh!!!.com> wrote in message =
news:464dc442@linux...
"Sarah" <sarahjane@sarahtonin.com> wrote in message =
news:464da14d@linux...
> Surely this doesn't surprise you . . . ? Perhaps if we'd been =
treating=20
> terrorism as the international criminal problem that it's always =
been=20
> instead of as a pretense for war,=20
.........now if they would just build an asprin factory there, we =
could attack it with a cruise missle. Looks like most of the people =
there are black so this would be PC.
flourishing nests of fanatical morons like=20
> this would be nipped in the bud. Hey, fight the fire, I'm with =
you, but I=20
> hope you don't think what we've been doing in Iraq for the last =
four years=20
> has done anything but fan the flames.
>=20
there are lots of flourishing nests of fanatical morons Sarah.
http://melbourne.indymedia.org/news/2006/12/135069_comment.p hp
> Some alternative quotations:
>=20
> "And now the whole nation--pulpit and all-- will take up the =
war-cry, and=20
> shout itself hoarse, and mob any honest man who ventures to open =
his mouth;=20
> and presently such mouths will cease to open. Next the statesmen =
will invent=20
> cheap lies, putting the blame upon the nation that is attacked, =
and every=20
> man will be glad of those conscience-soothing falsities, and =
will diligently=20
> study them, and refuse to examine any refutations of them; and =
thus he will=20
> by and by convince himself that the war is just, and will thank =
God for the=20
> better sleep he enjoys after this process of grotesque =
self-deception." -=20
> Mark Twain, from The Mysterious Stranger
Mark Twain also said "Get your facts first, and then you can =
distort them as much as you please".
>=20
> "In the councils of government, we must guard against the =
acquisition of=20
> unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the=20
> military-industrial complex. The potential for the disastrous =
rise of=20
> misplaced power exists and will persist.
Mark Twain also said "I have been throught some terrible things in =
my life, some of which actually happened"
>=20
> We must never let the weight of this combination endanger our =
liberties or=20
> democratic processes. We should take nothing for granted. Only =
an alert and=20
> knowledgeable citizenry can compel the proper meshing of the =
huge industrial=20
> and military machinery of defense with our peaceful methods and =
goals, so=20
> that security and liberty may prosper together." - Dwight D. =
Eisenhower,=20
> 1961
Deej also said "An alert and knowledgable citizenry depends upon =
an alert and knowldegable CIA"=20
> "...it makes one wonder about the illegal alien fuss. Are great =
numbers of=20
> our unemployed really victims of the illegal alien invasion or =
are those=20
> illegal tourists actually doing work our own people won't do? =
One thing is=20
> certain in this hungry world; no regulation or law should be =
allowed if it=20
> results in crops rotting in the fields for lack of harvesters." =
- Ronald=20
> Reagan
I agree with this. I also think I should not have to produce any =
identification, pay taxes and the ER here should be my own personal =
health insurance, which I don't have to pay. Paying vehicle insurance is =
such a pain in the ass, I shouldn't have to do hqat either. I also liked =
living in Mexico quite a bit. Problem is, I can't got there and live. If =
I go down there without any papers, they will throw me in jail. If I =
have a wreck down there without insurance, they will throw me in jail. I =
know these things for a fact. Pisses me off.
>=20
> "You can go to live in France, but you cannot become a =
Frenchman; you can go=20
> to live in Germany, you cannot become a German- or a Turk, or a =
Greek, or=20
> whatever. But anyone, from any corner of the world, can come to =
live in=20
> America and become an American." - more Ronald Reagan
I think it's sooooo cool when people who are liberal quote Reagan. =
Are you a Reagan fan Sarah? Did you enjoy the Contra Show? How about the =
way we paid for it by selling cocaine in the inner cities? Ollie North =
one of your heroes?=20
>=20
> "I do not agree that the dog in a manger has the final right to =
the manger=20
> even though he may have lain there for a very long time. I do =
not admit that=20
> right. I do not admit for instance, that a great wrong has been =
done to the=20
> Red Indians of America or the black people of Australia. I do =
not admit that=20
> a wrong has been done to these people by the fact that a =
stronger race, a=20
> higher-grade race has come in and taken their place." - Winston =
Churchill=20
> (who apparently never said that thing about liberal/conservative =
heart/brain=20
> http://www.winstonchurchill.org/i4a/pages/index.cfm?pageid=3 D112 =
)
I'll bet if we just got a few lawyers involved, they could find a =
way to challenge the title to this land, then we could pass a law that =
handed Islamberg over to the Senecas and they would kick their asses out =
of there in a heartbeat and set up a casino.
=20
> "Religion poisons everything." - Christopher Hitchens
"I read in the newspapers they are going to have 30 minutes of =
intellectual stuff on television every Monday from 7.30 to 8.00 to =
educate America. They couldn't educate America if they started at =
6:30".-Groucho Marx
>>Patriotism is the last refuge of a scoundrel" - Samuel Johnson
"When we have lost everything, including hope, life becomes a =
disgrace, and death a duty."-W.C. Fields
>=20
> "Oh, my God! Space aliens! Don't eat me! I have a wife and kids. =
Eat=20
> them!" - Homer Simpson
>=20
> "Get Eurass Back to Eurasia" - anti-immigrant protest sign from =
Simpsons=20
> episode
"We don't have a permit. Run! "-Edward D. Wood, Jr.
>=20
> Courage,
> Sarah ( . . . if I only had a brain . . . )
"I thoroughly disapprove of duels. If a man should challenge me, I =
would take him kindly and forgivingly by the hand and lead him to a =
quiet place and kill him"-Mark Twain.
;o)
>=20
> http://www.winstonchurchill.org/i4a/pages/index.cfm?pageid=3 D112
> "Rich Lamanna" <richard.lamanna@verizon.net> wrote in message=20
> news:464ce932@linux...
>> You can thank me for lighting the fire, you can all fan the =
flames. Why=20
>> the
>> heck not welcome some more illegals.
>>
>> http://www.canadafreepress.com/2007/paul-williams051107.htm
>>
>> "Eternal vigilance is the price of liberty." -- Wendell =
Phillips
>>
>> "No man is entitled to the blessings of freedom unless he be =
vigilant in=20
>> its
>> preservation." -- General Douglas MacArthur
>>
>> "FREEDOM IS NOT FOR THE TIMID." -- posted as an announcement =
outside a
>> Unitarian Church in Texas on Sept. 17, 2001
>>
>> "In the beginning of a change the patriot is a scarce man, and =
brave, and
>> hated
>> and scorned. When his cause succeeds, the timid join him, for =
then it=20
>> costs
>> nothing
>> to be a patriot." -- Mark Twain
>>
>> "History does not long entrust the care of freedom to the weak =
or the
>> timid."
>> -- Dwight D. Eisenhower, First Inaugural Address, Jan. 20, 1953
>>
>> "The future doesn't belong to the faint-hearted. It belongs to =
the=20
>> brave."
>> -- Ronald Reagan
>>
>> "The battle, sir, is not to the strong alone; it is to the =
vigilant, the
>> active,
>> the brave." -- Patrick Henry
>>
>> "The land of the free will cease to be when it's no longer the =
home of
>> the brave."-- Rick Gaber
>>
>> "Any 20 year-old who isn't a liberal doesn't have a heart,
>> and any 40 year-old who isn't a conservative doesn't have a =
brain." --=20
>> Winston Churchill
>>
>> Guidance,
>> Rich
>>
>>
>>=20
>=20
>
------=_NextPart_000_005F_01C79B22.57761BE0
Content-Type: text/html;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=3DContent-Type content=3D"text/html; =
charset=3Diso-8859-1">
<META content=3D"MSHTML 6.00.2800.1555" name=3DGENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT size=3D2>Good point! As you say, go figure.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=3D2>Rich</FONT><BR></DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE dir=3Dltr=20
style=3D"PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; =
BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
<DIV>"DJ" <<A=20
=
href=3D"http://www.aarrrrggghhh!!!.com">www.aarrrrggghhh!!!.com</A>> =
wrote in=20
message <A =
href=3D"news:464ddbf0@linux">news:464ddbf0@linux</A>...</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>The thing that has always intrigued =
me is how the=20
folks on the far left in this country slag the only administration =
that is=20
willing to fight for their right to slag the administration. The=20
leftleaning/outspoken first amendment loving folks will be the first =
to be=20
slaughtered by those that they are tacitly assisting in defeating the =
policies=20
of this administration.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>go figure.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>;o}</FONT></DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE dir=3Dltr=20
style=3D"PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; =
BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
<DIV>"Rich Lamanna" <<A=20
=
href=3D"mailto:richard.lamanna@verizon.net">richard.lamanna@verizon.net</=
A>>=20
wrote in message <A=20
href=3D"news:464dc9f4@linux">news:464dc9f4@linux</A>...</DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=3D2>Deej, Interesting article by Fred Halliday, well =
written.=20
It astounds me at how the left continues to justify and make excuses =
for=20
Islamic extremist violence and fascism while at the same time=20
condemn those democratic and freedom loving people, =
who=20
reserve the right to defend themselves against such =
attacks.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=3D2>Rich</FONT><BR></DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE dir=3Dltr=20
style=3D"PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; =
BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
<DIV>"DJ" <<A=20
=
href=3D"http://www.aarrrrggghhh!!!.com">www.aarrrrggghhh!!!.com</A>>=20
wrote in message <A=20
href=3D"news:464dc442@linux">news:464dc442@linux</A>...</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>"Sarah" <</FONT><A=20
href=3D"mailto:sarahjane@sarahtonin.com"><FONT face=3DArial=20
size=3D2>sarahjane@sarahtonin.com</FONT></A><FONT face=3DArial =
size=3D2>>=20
wrote in message </FONT><A href=3D"news:464da14d@linux"><FONT =
face=3DArial=20
size=3D2>news:464da14d@linux</FONT></A><FONT face=3DArial=20
size=3D2>...</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>> Surely this doesn't surprise =
you . . .=20
? Perhaps if we'd been treating <BR>> terrorism as the=20
international criminal problem that it's always been <BR>> =
instead of=20
as a pretense for war, </FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>.........now if they would just =
build an=20
asprin factory there, we could attack it with a cruise missle. =
Looks like=20
most of the people there are black so this would be =
PC.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>flourishing nests of fanatical =
morons like=20
<BR>> this would be nipped in the bud. Hey, fight the =
fire, I'm=20
with you, but I <BR>> hope you don't think what we've been =
doing in=20
Iraq for the last four years <BR>> has done anything but fan =
the=20
flames.<BR>> </FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>there are lots of flourishing =
nests of=20
fanatical morons Sarah.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2> </FONT><A=20
=
href=3D" http://melbourne.indymedia.org/news/2006/12/135069_comment.p hp"><=
FONT=20
face=3DArial=20
=
size=3D2> http://melbourne.indymedia.org/news/2006/12/135069_comment.p hp</=
FONT></A></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><BR><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>> Some alternative =
quotations:<BR>>=20
<BR>> "And now the whole nation--pulpit and all-- will take up =
the=20
war-cry, and <BR>> shout itself hoarse, and mob any honest man =
who=20
ventures to open his mouth; <BR>> and presently such mouths =
will cease=20
to open. Next the statesmen will invent <BR>> cheap lies, =
putting the=20
blame upon the nation that is attacked, and every <BR>> man =
will be=20
glad of those conscience-soothing falsities, and will diligently =
<BR>>=20
study them, and refuse to examine any refutations of them; and =
thus he=20
will <BR>> by and by convince himself that the war is just, and =
will=20
thank God for the <BR>> better sleep he enjoys after this =
process of=20
grotesque self-deception." - <BR>> Mark Twain, from The =
Mysterious=20
Stranger</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Mark Twain also said "Get your =
facts first,=20
and then you can distort them as much as you please".</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><BR><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>> <BR>> "In the =
councils of=20
government, we must guard against the acquisition of <BR>> =
unwarranted=20
influence, whether sought or unsought, by the <BR>> =
military-industrial=20
complex. The potential for the disastrous rise of <BR>> =
misplaced power=20
exists and will persist.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Mark Twain also said "I have been =
throught=20
some terrible things in my life, some of which actually=20
happened"</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><BR><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>> <BR>> We must never =
let the=20
weight of this combination endanger our liberties or <BR>> =
democratic=20
processes. We should take nothing for granted. Only an alert and =
<BR>>=20
knowledgeable citizenry can compel the proper meshing of the huge=20
industrial <BR>> and military machinery of defense with our =
peaceful=20
methods and goals, so <BR>> that security and liberty may =
prosper=20
together." - Dwight D. Eisenhower, <BR>> 1961</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Deej also said "An alert and =
knowledgable=20
citizenry depends upon an alert and knowldegable CIA" =
</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><BR><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>> "...it makes one wonder =
about the=20
illegal alien fuss. Are great numbers of <BR>> our unemployed =
really=20
victims of the illegal alien invasion or are those <BR>> =
illegal=20
tourists actually doing work our own people won't do? One thing is =
<BR>> certain in this hungry world; no regulation or law should =
be=20
allowed if it <BR>> results in crops rotting in the fields for =
lack of=20
harvesters." - Ronald <BR>> Reagan</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>I agree with this. I also think I =
should not=20
have to produce any identification, pay taxes and the ER here =
should be my=20
own personal health insurance, which I don't have to pay. Paying =
vehicle=20
insurance is such a pain in the ass, I shouldn't have to do hqat =
either. I=20
also liked living in Mexico quite a bit. Problem is, I can't got =
there and=20
live. If I go down there without any papers, they will throw me in =
jail.=20
If I have a wreck down there without insurance, they will throw me =
in=20
jail. I know these things for a fact. Pisses me=20
off.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><BR><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>> <BR>> "You can go to =
live in=20
France, but you cannot become a Frenchman; you can go <BR>> to =
live in=20
Germany, you cannot become a German- or a Turk, or a Greek, or =
<BR>>=20
whatever. But anyone, from any corner of the world, can come to =
live in=20
<BR>> America and become an American." - more Ronald=20
Reagan</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>I think it's sooooo cool when =
people who are=20
liberal quote Reagan. Are you a Reagan fan Sarah? Did you enjoy =
the Contra=20
Show? How about the way we paid for it by selling cocaine in the =
inner=20
cities? Ollie North one of your heroes? </FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>> <BR>> "I do not =
agree that the=20
dog in a manger has the final right to the manger <BR>> even =
though he=20
may have lain there for a very long time. I do not admit that =
<BR>>=20
right. I do not admit for instance, that a great wrong has been =
done to=20
the <BR>> Red Indians of America or the black people of =
Australia. I do=20
not admit that <BR>> a wrong has been done to these people by =
the fact=20
that a stronger race, a <BR>> higher-grade race has come in and =
taken=20
their place." - Winston Churchill <BR>> (who apparently never =
said that=20
thing about liberal/conservative heart/brain <BR>> </FONT><A=20
=
href=3D" http://www.winstonchurchill.org/i4a/pages/index.cfm?pageid=3 D112"=
><FONT=20
face=3DArial=20
=
size=3D2> http://www.winstonchurchill.org/i4a/pages/index.cfm?pageid=3 D112=
</FONT></A><FONT=20
face=3DArial size=3D2> )</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>I'll bet if we just got a few =
lawyers=20
involved, they could find a way to challenge the title to this =
land, then=20
we could pass a law that handed Islamberg over to the Senecas=20
and they would kick their asses out of there in a heartbeat =
and set=20
up a casino.<BR> <BR>> "Religion poisons everything." -=20
Christopher Hitchens</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT><FONT face=3DArial=20
size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>"I read in the newspapers they =
are going to=20
have 30 minutes of intellectual stuff on television every Monday =
from 7.30=20
to 8.00 to educate America. They couldn't educate America if they =
started=20
at 6:30".-Groucho Marx<BR></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>>>Patriotism is the last =
refuge of a=20
scoundrel" - Samuel Johnson</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=3D+0>=93When we have lost everything, including =
hope, life=20
becomes a disgrace, and death a duty."-</FONT><FONT face=3DArial=20
size=3D2><FONT face=3D"Times New Roman" size=3D3><FONT =
face=3DVerdana size=3D2>W.C.=20
Fields</FONT></FONT><BR>> <BR>> "Oh, my God! Space aliens! =
Don't eat=20
me! I have a wife and kids. Eat <BR>> them!" - Homer =
Simpson</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><BR>> <BR>> "Get Eurass Back to Eurasia" - =
anti-immigrant=20
protest sign from Simpsons <BR>> episode</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>"We don't have a permit. Run! "-Edward D. Wood, =
Jr.<BR><BR>>=20
<BR>> Courage,<BR>> Sarah ( . . . if I only had a brain . . =
..=20
)</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>"I thoroughly disapprove of =
duels. If a man=20
should challenge me, I would take him kindly and forgivingly by =
the hand=20
and lead him to a quiet place and kill him"-Mark =
Twain.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>;o)</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2> </DIV>
<DIV><BR>> <BR>> </FONT><A=20
=
href=3D" http://www.winstonchurchill.org/i4a/pages/index.cfm?pageid=3 D112"=
><FONT=20
face=3DArial=20
=
size=3D2> http://www.winstonchurchill.org/i4a/pages/index.cfm?pageid=3 D112=
</FONT></A><BR><FONT=20
face=3DArial size=3D2>> "Rich Lamanna" <</FONT><A=20
href=3D"mailto:richard.lamanna@verizon.net"><FONT face=3DArial=20
size=3D2>richard.lamanna@verizon.net</FONT></A><FONT face=3DArial =
size=3D2>>=20
wrote in message <BR>> </FONT><A =
href=3D"news:464ce932@linux"><FONT=20
face=3DArial size=3D2>news:464ce932@linux</FONT></A><FONT =
face=3DArial=20
size=3D2>...<BR>>> You can thank me for lighting the fire, =
you can all=20
fan the flames. Why <BR>>> the<BR>>> heck not welcome =
some=20
more illegals.<BR>>><BR>>> </FONT><A=20
=
href=3D"http://www.canadafreepress.com/2007/paul-williams051107.htm"><FON=
T=20
face=3DArial=20
=
size=3D2>http://www.canadafreepress.com/2007/paul-williams051107.htm</FON=
T></A><BR><FONT=20
face=3DArial size=3D2>>><BR>>> "Eternal vigilance is =
the price of=20
liberty." -- Wendell Phillips<BR>>><BR>>> "No man is =
entitled=20
to the blessings of freedom unless he be vigilant in <BR>>>=20
its<BR>>> preservation." -- General Douglas=20
MacArthur<BR>>><BR>>> "FREEDOM IS NOT FOR THE TIMID." =
--=20
posted as an announcement outside a<BR>>> Unitarian Church =
in Texas=20
on Sept. 17, 2001<BR>>><BR>>> "In the beginning of a =
change=20
the patriot is a scarce man, and brave, and<BR>>> =
hated<BR>>>=20
and scorned. When his cause succeeds, the timid join him, for then =
it=20
<BR>>> costs<BR>>> nothing<BR>>> to be a =
patriot." --=20
Mark Twain<BR>>><BR>>> "History does not long entrust =
the care=20
of freedom to the weak or the<BR>>> timid."<BR>>> -- =
Dwight D.=20
Eisenhower, First Inaugural Address, Jan. 20, =
1953<BR>>><BR>>>=20
"The future doesn't belong to the faint-hearted. It belongs =
to the=20
<BR>>> brave."<BR>>> -- Ronald =
Reagan<BR>>><BR>>>=20
"The battle, sir, is not to the strong alone; it is to the =
vigilant,=20
the<BR>>> active,<BR>>> the brave." -- Patrick=20
Henry<BR>>><BR>>> "The land of the free will cease to =
be when=20
it's no longer the home of<BR>>> the brave."-- Rick=20
Gaber<BR>>><BR>>> "Any 20 year-old who isn't a liberal =
doesn't=20
have a heart,<BR>>> and any 40 year-old who isn't a =
conservative=20
doesn't have a brain." -- <BR>>> Winston=20
Churchill<BR>>><BR>>> Guidance,<BR>>>=20
Rich<BR>>><BR>>><BR>>> <BR>>=20
=
<BR>></FONT></DIV></BLOCKQUOTE></BLOCKQUOTE></BLOCKQUOTE ></BODY></HTML=
>
------=_NextPart_000_005F_01C79B22.57761BE0--
|
|
|
|
| Re: Springtime in Islamberg. [message #84885 is a reply to message #84850] |
Mon, 21 May 2007 02:34 |
Sarah
Messages: 608
Registered: February 2007
|
Senior Member |
|
|
This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
------=_NextPart_000_0044_01C79B50.8FCD3DB0
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Dude, that just sounds completely wacky to me. I'm sure you have good =
reasons for believing that, but it just don't make no sense to me. =
Besides, I think the Clarkes (Richard and Gen Wesley) would disagree =
with you, and I think they might know something.
You seriously like Ron Paul? I do. He talks like what my Republican =
parents taught me Republicans were all about, even if he seems mildly =
dingy at times. I'd vote for him over all those other sound bite dorks =
at the "debates," and over most of the dems, too.
S
"DJ" <www.aarrrrggghhh!!!.com> wrote in message =
news:46509cbf$1@linux...
I definitely believe this. The whole reason we are in Iraq and =
Afghanistan right now is because of Clinton's criminal ineptitude. You =
can be assured that I believe that clinton was, without a doubt, "^The =
worst" president in american history, bar none.
;o)
"Sarah" <sarahjane@sarahtonin.com> wrote in message =
news:465015b5$1@linux...
Sorry, I don't believe you. I'm sure you're making a point, but I =
don't believe you really think that.
Sorry. :)
SJB
"DJ" <www.aarrrrggghhh!!!.com> wrote in message =
news:464f1633@linux...
"
Here's what I think history will tell us: this was the most =
corrupt and destructive administration in US history, and the damage =
they did took years to recover from. (I'm optimistic)
Just my opinion. I could be wrong.
Naaaa! :)
S
I think that theis perfectly describes the Clinton =
administration.
go figure......
------=_NextPart_000_0044_01C79B50.8FCD3DB0
Content-Type: text/html;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=3DContent-Type content=3D"text/html; =
charset=3Diso-8859-1">
<META content=3D"MSHTML 6.00.6000.16441" name=3DGENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Dude, that just sounds completely wacky =
to=20
me. I'm sure you have good reasons for believing that, but it just =
don't=20
make no sense to me. Besides, I think the Clarkes (Richard and Gen =
Wesley)=20
would disagree with you, and I think they might know =
something.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>You seriously like Ron Paul? I =
do. =20
He talks like what my Republican parents taught me Republicans were =
all=20
about, even if he seems mildly dingy at times. I'd vote for him =
over all=20
those other sound bite dorks at the "debates," and over most of the =
dems,=20
too.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>S</FONT></DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE dir=3Dltr=20
style=3D"PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; =
BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
<DIV>"DJ" <<A=20
=
href=3D"http://www.aarrrrggghhh!!!.com">www.aarrrrggghhh!!!.com</A>> =
wrote in=20
message <A =
href=3D"news:46509cbf$1@linux">news:46509cbf$1@linux</A>...</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>I definitely believe this. The whole =
reason we=20
are in Iraq and Afghanistan right now is because of Clinton's criminal =
ineptitude. You can be assured that I believe that clinton was, =
without a=20
doubt, "^The worst" president in american history, bar =
none.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>;o)</FONT></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE dir=3Dltr=20
style=3D"PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; =
BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
<DIV>"Sarah" <<A=20
=
href=3D"mailto:sarahjane@sarahtonin.com">sarahjane@sarahtonin.com</A>>=
=20
wrote in message <A=20
href=3D"news:465015b5$1@linux">news:465015b5$1@linux</A>...</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Sorry, I don't believe you. =
I'm sure=20
you're making a point, but I don't believe you really think=20
that.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Sorry. :)</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>SJB</FONT></DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE dir=3Dltr=20
style=3D"PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; =
BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
<DIV>"DJ" <<A=20
=
href=3D"http://www.aarrrrggghhh!!!.com">www.aarrrrggghhh!!!.com</A>>=20
wrote in message <A=20
href=3D"news:464f1633@linux">news:464f1633@linux</A>...</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE dir=3Dltr=20
style=3D"PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; =
BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
<DIV>"<FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Here's what I think history =
will tell=20
us: this was the most corrupt and destructive =
administration in US=20
history, and the damage they did took years to recover =
from. (I'm=20
optimistic)</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Just my opinion. I could =
be=20
wrong.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Naaaa! :)</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>S</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>I think that theis perfectly =
describes the=20
Clinton administration.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>go=20
=
figure......</FONT></DIV></DIV></BLOCKQUOTE></BLOCKQUOTE ></BLOCKQUOTE></B=
LOCKQUOTE></BODY></HTML>
------=_NextPart_000_0044_01C79B50.8FCD3DB0--
|
|
|
|
| Re: Springtime in Islamberg. [message #84886 is a reply to message #84860] |
Mon, 21 May 2007 02:50 |
Sarah
Messages: 608
Registered: February 2007
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Hmm . . . sounds more like the consequences of what you believe is implicit
in my statements. So, like I said, you're assuming assumptions not in
evidence.
And, yes, Elton John would wear a burqa, but he would drop the veil before
he sang.
SJB
"DC" <dc@spammersinhell.com> wrote in message news:4650cca3$1@linux...
>
> "Sarah" <sarahjane@sarahtonin.com> wrote:
>>Hmm . . . well, I'm not assuming any of those things that you assume I'm
>
>>assuming.
>
> Of course you are. It is implicit in the points you made.
>
> for instance, when you say "are you safer now?" you imply there
> is a way to be safer. If not, then you accept that we are about
> as "safe" as we were. I call that a win, given the death of
> Saddam and the birth of democracy in Iraq. If there is a way
> to be safer, you have not offered it.
>
> No stereotypes here, just the consequences of your own
> statements.
>
> DC
>
> Do you think Elton John would wear a Burqua???
|
|
|
|
| Re: Springtime in Islamberg. [message #84889 is a reply to message #84885] |
Mon, 21 May 2007 04:10 |
ulfiyya
Messages: 25
Registered: July 2005
|
Junior Member |
|
|
I thenk better to change to name of this site!
I thought that this is a Paris forum site,not a political site
Greets,
>
>
>Dude, that just sounds completely wacky to me. I'm sure you have good =
>reasons for believing that, but it just don't make no sense to me. =
>Besides, I think the Clarkes (Richard and Gen Wesley) would disagree =
>with you, and I think they might know something.
>
>You seriously like Ron Paul? I do. He talks like what my Republican =
>parents taught me Republicans were all about, even if he seems mildly =
>dingy at times. I'd vote for him over all those other sound bite dorks
=
>at the "debates," and over most of the dems, too.
>
>S
> "DJ" <www.aarrrrggghhh!!!.com> wrote in message =
>news:46509cbf$1@linux...
> I definitely believe this. The whole reason we are in Iraq and =
>Afghanistan right now is because of Clinton's criminal ineptitude. You =
>can be assured that I believe that clinton was, without a doubt, "^The =
>worst" president in american history, bar none.
>
> ;o)
>
> "Sarah" <sarahjane@sarahtonin.com> wrote in message =
>news:465015b5$1@linux...
> Sorry, I don't believe you. I'm sure you're making a point, but I =
>don't believe you really think that.
>
> Sorry. :)
>
> SJB
> "DJ" <www.aarrrrggghhh!!!.com> wrote in message =
>news:464f1633@linux...
>
> "
> Here's what I think history will tell us: this was the most =
>corrupt and destructive administration in US history, and the damage =
>they did took years to recover from. (I'm optimistic)
>
> Just my opinion. I could be wrong.
>
> Naaaa! :)
>
> S
>
>
>
>
> I think that theis perfectly describes the Clinton =
>administration.
>
> go figure......
>
><!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
><HTML><HEAD>
><META http-equiv=3DContent-Type content=3D"text/html; =
>charset=3Diso-8859-1">
><META content=3D"MSHTML 6.00.6000.16441" name=3DGENERATOR>
><STYLE></STYLE>
></HEAD>
><BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
><DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Dude, that just sounds completely wacky
=
>to=20
>me. I'm sure you have good reasons for believing that, but it just =
>don't=20
>make no sense to me. Besides, I think the Clarkes (Richard and Gen =
>Wesley)=20
>would disagree with you, and I think they might know =
>something.</FONT></DIV>
><DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
><DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>You seriously like Ron Paul? I =
>do. =20
>He talks like what my Republican parents taught me Republicans were =
>all=20
>about, even if he seems mildly dingy at times. I'd vote for him =
>over all=20
>those other sound bite dorks at the "debates," and over most of the =
>dems,=20
>too.</FONT></DIV>
><DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
><DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>S</FONT></DIV>
><BLOCKQUOTE dir=3Dltr=20
>style=3D"PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; =
>BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
> <DIV>"DJ" <<A=20
> =
>href=3D"http://www.aarrrrggghhh!!!.com">www.aarrrrggghhh!!!.com</A>> =
>wrote in=20
> message <A =
>href=3D"news:46509cbf$1@linux">news:46509cbf$1@linux</A>...</DIV>
> <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>I definitely believe this. The whole
=
>reason we=20
> are in Iraq and Afghanistan right now is because of Clinton's criminal
=
>
> ineptitude. You can be assured that I believe that clinton was, =
>without a=20
> doubt, "^The worst" president in american history, bar =
>none.</FONT></DIV>
> <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
> <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>;o)</FONT></DIV>
> <DIV> </DIV>
> <BLOCKQUOTE dir=3Dltr=20
> style=3D"PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; =
>BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
> <DIV>"Sarah" <<A=20
> =
>href=3D"mailto:sarahjane@sarahtonin.com">sarahjane@sarahtonin.com</A>>=
>=20
> wrote in message <A=20
> href=3D"news:465015b5$1@linux">news:465015b5$1@linux</A>...</DIV>
> <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Sorry, I don't believe you. =
>I'm sure=20
> you're making a point, but I don't believe you really think=20
> that.</FONT></DIV>
> <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
> <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Sorry. :)</FONT></DIV>
> <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
> <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>SJB</FONT></DIV>
> <BLOCKQUOTE dir=3Dltr=20
> style=3D"PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; =
>BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
> <DIV>"DJ" <<A=20
> =
>href=3D"http://www.aarrrrggghhh!!!.com">www.aarrrrggghhh!!!.com</A>>=20
> wrote in message <A=20
> href=3D"news:464f1633@linux">news:464f1633@linux</A>...</DIV>
> <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
> <BLOCKQUOTE dir=3Dltr=20
> style=3D"PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px;
=
>BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
> <DIV>"<FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT></DIV>
> <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Here's what I think history =
>will tell=20
> us: this was the most corrupt and destructive =
>administration in US=20
> history, and the damage they did took years to recover =
>from. (I'm=20
> optimistic)</FONT></DIV>
> <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
> <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Just my opinion. I could =
>be=20
> wrong.</FONT></DIV>
> <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
> <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Naaaa! :)</FONT></DIV>
> <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
> <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>S</FONT></DIV>
> <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
> <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
> <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
> <DIV>
> <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
> <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>I think that theis perfectly =
>describes the=20
> Clinton administration.</FONT></DIV>
> <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
> <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>go=20
> =
>figure......</FONT></DIV></DIV></BLOCKQUOTE></BLOCKQUOTE ></BLOCKQUOTE></B=
>LOCKQUOTE></BODY></HTML>
>
>
|
|
|
|
| Re: OT: Springtime in Islamberg. [message #84891 is a reply to message #84862] |
Mon, 21 May 2007 04:36 |
Bill L
Messages: 766
Registered: August 2006
|
Senior Member |
|
|
There is one salient difference between WWI & II and our wars in
Afghanistan and Iraq. We did not start the WWs. We did start the recent
wars. You can't call 9/11 acts of war from those nations. They are acts
of vindictiveness from a tiny group of completely evil lunatic fringe
players.
Bill L
Rich Lamanna wrote:
>> To react to that, to conduct a "War Against Terrorism" is
>> about as desperate and pathetic IMHO.
>
> Bill, it's not a war against terrorism, this is a misnomer. It is a war
> against "Radical Islamic Extremism" and their desire to impose an Islamic
> theocratic caliphate on the free world.
>
>> And it's so uncreative and historically repetitive as to be a big dumb
>> bore.
>
> We defeated Japan and Germany and they're not the worst allies. Come to
> think of it, we bailed out the French in WW2 and what the hell did we get in
> return, Chirac? Maybe now, however, with Nicolas Sarkozy we'll be better
> thought of.
>
> Rich
>
> 'Any 20 year-old who isn't a liberal doesn't have a heart,
> and any 40 year-old who isn't a conservative doesn't have a brain.' -
> Winston Churchill
>
> "Bill L" <bill@billlorentzen.com> wrote in message news:464e6433@linux...
>> It was too early when I wrote that.
>>
>> Look, it's a thorny issue. The point I was trying to make is I support
>> the freedom of those religions that grant others the same freedom. I
>> don't support freedom of a religion that is trying to curtail freedom,
>> you dig?
>>
>> We have to take responsibility for mis-guided people just the way one
>> does for a child. With a small child, you don't get angry and punish him
>> or her for making a bad choice. You exert calm, confident control and
>> direct it towards the right choice. We have to be bigger than them, and
>> not react angrily to their desperate attempts to cause an effect on us.
>> Think how pathetically desperate a group must be if the only way they
>> can dream up to communicate is through terrorism. That is quite
>> pathetic.>
> Just think how much more effective and creative it would have been
>> to spend a few billion dollars to simply buy access to the terrorists
>> and then put them away. Very little collateral damage. The people who
>> stand up for freedom by denouncing the terrorists get rich as they
>> deserve for their bravery and everybody else lives happier, free-er lives.
>>
>> I know some will say it would never work like that, but did anyone ever
> try?
>> Bill
>>
>>
>> Rich Lamanna wrote:
>>> Bill, I have no problem with freedom, you infidel :-) I am a
>>> constitutionalist and believe strongly in the 1st amendment.
> Unfortunately
>>> the radical Islamic doesn't cherish those same freedoms you and I hold
>>> dearly. They are willing to die to impose their fascism and intolerant
>>> theocratic rubbish upon us.
>>>
>>> Remember Waco. The ATF, under the administration of Clinton and Janet
>>> Sterno, stormed the Branch Davidian home, in Rambo fashion, to serve a
>>> search warrant issued on the suspicion that the group was stockpiling
>>> automatic weapons, massacring almost 100 hundred men, women, and
> children.
>>> But I doubt that the FBI or ATF would ever raid these holy men, oh God
> no,
>>> despite the fact that they are irrefutably armed to the teeth and
> practicing
>>> for violent Jihad.
>>>
>>> Did you read the article dude? Did you read the part about the violent
>>> incidents involving Jamaat Ul Fuora in the US?
>>> "By 2004 federal investigators uncovered evidence that linked both the
> DC
>>> "sniper killer" John Allen Muhammed and "Shoe Bomber" Richard Reid to
> the
>>> group and reports surfaced that Wall Street Journal reporter Daniel
> Pearl
>>> was captured and beheaded in the process of attempting to obtain an
>>> interview with Sheikh Gilani in Pakistan."
>>>
>>> http://www.canadafreepress.com/images/paul-williams-map-larg e.jpg
>>>
>>> What were Koresh and the Davidians guilty of? Maybe of being Christians.
>>> Nothing compared to this group. Wake up man, this is not about freedom
> of
>>> religion this is about a Jihad threatening our existence and the choice
> to
>>> exercise any freedoms let alone freedom of religion. We had better keep
> an
>>> eye on these guys.
>>>
>>> Rich
>>>
>>> From my cold dead hands - Charlton Heston
>>>
>>>
>>> "Bill L" <bill@billlorentzen.com> wrote in message
> news:464d8d4f@linux...
>>>> I strongly support freedom, especially freedom of religion. Part of
>>>> religious freedom is the freedom of religious choice.
>>>>
>>>> A religion worthy of freedom would increase individual freedom.
>>>>
>>>> With freedom comes increased responsibility; with increased
>>>> responsibility comes increased freedom. By increasing freedoms for all
>>>> one's own freedoms are increased.
>>>>
>>>> “Constant and continual alertness is the price of freedom.
>>>> Constant willingness to fight back is the price of freedom.
>>>> There is no other price actually.”
>>>> — L. RON HUBBARD
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Rich Lamanna wrote:
>>>>> You can thank me for lighting the fire, you can all fan the flames.
> Why
>>> the
>>>>> heck not welcome some more illegals.
>>>>>
>>>>> http://www.canadafreepress.com/2007/paul-williams051107.htm
>>>>>
>>>>> "Eternal vigilance is the price of liberty." -- Wendell Phillips
>>>>>
>>>>> "No man is entitled to the blessings of freedom unless he be vigilant
> in
>>> its
>>>>> preservation." -- General Douglas MacArthur
>>>>>
>>>>> "FREEDOM IS NOT FOR THE TIMID." -- posted as an announcement outside a
>>>>> Unitarian Church in Texas on Sept. 17, 2001
>>>>>
>>>>> "In the beginning of a change the patriot is a scarce man, and brave,
>>> and
>>>>> hated
>>>>> and scorned. When his cause succeeds, the timid join him, for then it
>>> costs
>>>>> nothing
>>>>> to be a patriot." -- Mark Twain
>>>>>
>>>>> "History does not long entrust the care of freedom to the weak or the
>>>>> timid."
>>>>> -- Dwight D. Eisenhower, First Inaugural Address, Jan. 20, 1953
>>>>>
>>>>> "The future doesn't belong to the faint-hearted. It belongs to the
>>> brave."
>>>>> -- Ronald Reagan
>>>>>
>>>>> "The battle, sir, is not to the strong alone; it is to the vigilant,
> the
>>>>> active,
>>>>> the brave." -- Patrick Henry
>>>>>
>>>>> "The land of the free will cease to be when it's no longer the home of
>>>>> the brave."-- Rick Gaber
>>>>>
>>>>> "Any 20 year-old who isn't a liberal doesn't have a heart,
>>>>> and any 40 year-old who isn't a conservative doesn't have a brain." --
>>>>> Winston Churchill
>>>>>
>>>>> Guidance,
>>>>> Rich
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>
>
>
|
|
|
|
| Re: OT: Springtime in Islamberg. [message #84896 is a reply to message #84891] |
Mon, 21 May 2007 06:57 |
dc[3]
Messages: 895
Registered: September 2005
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Rubbish. That's like not blaming the Nazis for the beer hall putsch...
It was just those few lunatics...
There's no difference in any way that matters, between the leadership of
the Mullahs in Afghanistan and the AQ's they harbored. And it was an
act of war. Period.
DC
Bill L <bill@billlorentzen.com> wrote:
>There is one salient difference between WWI & II and our wars in
>Afghanistan and Iraq. We did not start the WWs. We did start the recent
>wars. You can't call 9/11 acts of war from those nations. They are acts
>of vindictiveness from a tiny group of completely evil lunatic fringe
>players.
>
>Bill L
>
>
>Rich Lamanna wrote:
>>> To react to that, to conduct a "War Against Terrorism" is
>>> about as desperate and pathetic IMHO.
>>
>> Bill, it's not a war against terrorism, this is a misnomer. It is a war
>> against "Radical Islamic Extremism" and their desire to impose an Islamic
>> theocratic caliphate on the free world.
>>
>>> And it's so uncreative and historically repetitive as to be a big dumb
>>> bore.
>>
>> We defeated Japan and Germany and they're not the worst allies. Come to
>> think of it, we bailed out the French in WW2 and what the hell did we
get in
>> return, Chirac? Maybe now, however, with Nicolas Sarkozy we'll be better
>> thought of.
>>
>> Rich
>>
>> 'Any 20 year-old who isn't a liberal doesn't have a heart,
>> and any 40 year-old who isn't a conservative doesn't have a brain.' -
>> Winston Churchill
>>
>> "Bill L" <bill@billlorentzen.com> wrote in message news:464e6433@linux...
>>> It was too early when I wrote that.
>>>
>>> Look, it's a thorny issue. The point I was trying to make is I support
>>> the freedom of those religions that grant others the same freedom. I
>>> don't support freedom of a religion that is trying to curtail freedom,
>>> you dig?
>>>
>>> We have to take responsibility for mis-guided people just the way one
>>> does for a child. With a small child, you don't get angry and punish
him
>>> or her for making a bad choice. You exert calm, confident control and
>>> direct it towards the right choice. We have to be bigger than them, and
>>> not react angrily to their desperate attempts to cause an effect on us.
>>> Think how pathetically desperate a group must be if the only way they
>>> can dream up to communicate is through terrorism. That is quite
>>> pathetic.>
>> Just think how much more effective and creative it would have been
>>> to spend a few billion dollars to simply buy access to the terrorists
>>> and then put them away. Very little collateral damage. The people who
>>> stand up for freedom by denouncing the terrorists get rich as they
>>> deserve for their bravery and everybody else lives happier, free-er lives.
>>>
>>> I know some will say it would never work like that, but did anyone ever
>> try?
>>> Bill
>>>
>>>
>>> Rich Lamanna wrote:
>>>> Bill, I have no problem with freedom, you infidel :-) I am a
>>>> constitutionalist and believe strongly in the 1st amendment.
>> Unfortunately
>>>> the radical Islamic doesn't cherish those same freedoms you and I hold
>>>> dearly. They are willing to die to impose their fascism and intolerant
>>>> theocratic rubbish upon us.
>>>>
>>>> Remember Waco. The ATF, under the administration of Clinton and Janet
>>>> Sterno, stormed the Branch Davidian home, in Rambo fashion, to serve
a
>>>> search warrant issued on the suspicion that the group was stockpiling
>>>> automatic weapons, massacring almost 100 hundred men, women, and
>> children.
>>>> But I doubt that the FBI or ATF would ever raid these holy men, oh God
>> no,
>>>> despite the fact that they are irrefutably armed to the teeth and
>> practicing
>>>> for violent Jihad.
>>>>
>>>> Did you read the article dude? Did you read the part about the violent
>>>> incidents involving Jamaat Ul Fuora in the US?
>>>> "By 2004 federal investigators uncovered evidence that linked both the
>> DC
>>>> "sniper killer" John Allen Muhammed and "Shoe Bomber" Richard Reid to
>> the
>>>> group and reports surfaced that Wall Street Journal reporter Daniel
>> Pearl
>>>> was captured and beheaded in the process of attempting to obtain an
>>>> interview with Sheikh Gilani in Pakistan."
>>>>
>>>> http://www.canadafreepress.com/images/paul-williams-map-larg e.jpg
>>>>
>>>> What were Koresh and the Davidians guilty of? Maybe of being Christians.
>>>> Nothing compared to this group. Wake up man, this is not about freedom
>> of
>>>> religion this is about a Jihad threatening our existence and the choice
>> to
>>>> exercise any freedoms let alone freedom of religion. We had better keep
>> an
>>>> eye on these guys.
>>>>
>>>> Rich
>>>>
>>>> From my cold dead hands - Charlton Heston
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> "Bill L" <bill@billlorentzen.com> wrote in message
>> news:464d8d4f@linux...
>>>>> I strongly support freedom, especially freedom of religion. Part of
>>>>> religious freedom is the freedom of religious choice.
>>>>>
>>>>> A religion worthy of freedom would increase individual freedom.
>>>>>
>>>>> With freedom comes increased responsibility; with increased
>>>>> responsibility comes increased freedom. By increasing freedoms for
all
>>>>> one's own freedoms are increased.
>>>>>
>>>>> “Constant and continual alertness is the price of freedom.
>>>>> Constant willingness to fight back is the price of freedom.
>>>>> There is no other price actually.”
>>>>> — L. RON HUBBARD
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Rich Lamanna wrote:
>>>>>> You can thank me for lighting the fire, you can all fan the flames.
>> Why
>>>> the
>>>>>> heck not welcome some more illegals.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> http://www.canadafreepress.com/2007/paul-williams051107.htm
>>>>>>
>>>>>> "Eternal vigilance is the price of liberty." -- Wendell Phillips
>>>>>>
>>>>>> "No man is entitled to the blessings of freedom unless he be vigilant
>> in
>>>> its
>>>>>> preservation." -- General Douglas MacArthur
>>>>>>
>>>>>> "FREEDOM IS NOT FOR THE TIMID." -- posted as an announcement outside
a
>>>>>> Unitarian Church in Texas on Sept. 17, 2001
>>>>>>
>>>>>> "In the beginning of a change the patriot is a scarce man, and brave,
>>>> and
>>>>>> hated
>>>>>> and scorned. When his cause succeeds, the timid join him, for then
it
>>>> costs
>>>>>> nothing
>>>>>> to be a patriot." -- Mark Twain
>>>>>>
>>>>>> "History does not long entrust the care of freedom to the weak or
the
>>>>>> timid."
>>>>>> -- Dwight D. Eisenhower, First Inaugural Address, Jan. 20, 1953
>>>>>>
>>>>>> "The future doesn't belong to the faint-hearted. It belongs to the
>>>> brave."
>>>>>> -- Ronald Reagan
>>>>>>
>>>>>> "The battle, sir, is not to the strong alone; it is to the vigilant,
>> the
>>>>>> active,
>>>>>> the brave." -- Patrick Henry
>>>>>>
>>>>>> "The land of the free will cease to be when it's no longer the home
of
>>>>>> the brave."-- Rick Gaber
>>>>>>
>>>>>> "Any 20 year-old who isn't a liberal doesn't have a heart,
>>>>>> and any 40 year-old who isn't a conservative doesn't have a brain."
--
>>>>>> Winston Churchill
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Guidance,
>>>>>> Rich
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>
>>
>>
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: OT: Springtime in Islamberg. [message #84902 is a reply to message #84896] |
Mon, 21 May 2007 08:58 |
duncan
Messages: 123
Registered: November 2006
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Afghanistan, yes: clear connection to originators of 9/11; Iraq, no:
zero evidence then and now of even the slightest complicity in the
attacks of Sept. 01. Take your "rubbish" out with the rest of your
trash.
--chas.
On 21 May 2007 23:57:37 +1000, "DC" <dc@spammersinhell.com> wrote:
>
>Rubbish. That's like not blaming the Nazis for the beer hall putsch...
>It was just those few lunatics...
>
>There's no difference in any way that matters, between the leadership of
>the Mullahs in Afghanistan and the AQ's they harbored. And it was an
>act of war. Period.
>
>DC
>
>Bill L <bill@billlorentzen.com> wrote:
>>There is one salient difference between WWI & II and our wars in
>>Afghanistan and Iraq. We did not start the WWs. We did start the recent
>
>>wars. You can't call 9/11 acts of war from those nations. They are acts
>
>>of vindictiveness from a tiny group of completely evil lunatic fringe
>>players.
>>
>>Bill L
>>
>>
>>Rich Lamanna wrote:
>>>> To react to that, to conduct a "War Against Terrorism" is
>>>> about as desperate and pathetic IMHO.
>>>
>>> Bill, it's not a war against terrorism, this is a misnomer. It is a war
>>> against "Radical Islamic Extremism" and their desire to impose an Islamic
>>> theocratic caliphate on the free world.
>>>
>>>> And it's so uncreative and historically repetitive as to be a big dumb
>>>> bore.
>>>
>>> We defeated Japan and Germany and they're not the worst allies. Come to
>>> think of it, we bailed out the French in WW2 and what the hell did we
>get in
>>> return, Chirac? Maybe now, however, with Nicolas Sarkozy we'll be better
>>> thought of.
>>>
>>> Rich
>>>
>>> 'Any 20 year-old who isn't a liberal doesn't have a heart,
>>> and any 40 year-old who isn't a conservative doesn't have a brain.' -
>>> Winston Churchill
>>>
>>> "Bill L" <bill@billlorentzen.com> wrote in message news:464e6433@linux...
>>>> It was too early when I wrote that.
>>>>
>>>> Look, it's a thorny issue. The point I was trying to make is I support
>>>> the freedom of those religions that grant others the same freedom. I
>>>> don't support freedom of a religion that is trying to curtail freedom,
>>>> you dig?
>>>>
>>>> We have to take responsibility for mis-guided people just the way one
>>>> does for a child. With a small child, you don't get angry and punish
>him
>>>> or her for making a bad choice. You exert calm, confident control and
>>>> direct it towards the right choice. We have to be bigger than them, and
>>>> not react angrily to their desperate attempts to cause an effect on us.
>>>> Think how pathetically desperate a group must be if the only way they
>>>> can dream up to communicate is through terrorism. That is quite
>>>> pathetic.>
>>> Just think how much more effective and creative it would have been
>>>> to spend a few billion dollars to simply buy access to the terrorists
>>>> and then put them away. Very little collateral damage. The people who
>>>> stand up for freedom by denouncing the terrorists get rich as they
>>>> deserve for their bravery and everybody else lives happier, free-er lives.
>>>>
>>>> I know some will say it would never work like that, but did anyone ever
>>> try?
>>>> Bill
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Rich Lamanna wrote:
>>>>> Bill, I have no problem with freedom, you infidel :-) I am a
>>>>> constitutionalist and believe strongly in the 1st amendment.
>>> Unfortunately
>>>>> the radical Islamic doesn't cherish those same freedoms you and I hold
>>>>> dearly. They are willing to die to impose their fascism and intolerant
>>>>> theocratic rubbish upon us.
>>>>>
>>>>> Remember Waco. The ATF, under the administration of Clinton and Janet
>>>>> Sterno, stormed the Branch Davidian home, in Rambo fashion, to serve
>a
>>>>> search warrant issued on the suspicion that the group was stockpiling
>>>>> automatic weapons, massacring almost 100 hundred men, women, and
>>> children.
>>>>> But I doubt that the FBI or ATF would ever raid these holy men, oh God
>>> no,
>>>>> despite the fact that they are irrefutably armed to the teeth and
>>> practicing
>>>>> for violent Jihad.
>>>>>
>>>>> Did you read the article dude? Did you read the part about the violent
>>>>> incidents involving Jamaat Ul Fuora in the US?
>>>>> "By 2004 federal investigators uncovered evidence that linked both the
>>> DC
>>>>> "sniper killer" John Allen Muhammed and "Shoe Bomber" Richard Reid to
>>> the
>>>>> group and reports surfaced that Wall Street Journal reporter Daniel
>>> Pearl
>>>>> was captured and beheaded in the process of attempting to obtain an
>>>>> interview with Sheikh Gilani in Pakistan."
>>>>>
>>>>> http://www.canadafreepress.com/images/paul-williams-map-larg e.jpg
>>>>>
>>>>> What were Koresh and the Davidians guilty of? Maybe of being Christians.
>>>>> Nothing compared to this group. Wake up man, this is not about freedom
>>> of
>>>>> religion this is about a Jihad threatening our existence and the choice
>>> to
>>>>> exercise any freedoms let alone freedom of religion. We had better keep
>>> an
>>>>> eye on these guys.
>>>>>
>>>>> Rich
>>>>>
>>>>> From my cold dead hands - Charlton Heston
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> "Bill L" <bill@billlorentzen.com> wrote in message
>>> news:464d8d4f@linux...
>>>>>> I strongly support freedom, especially freedom of religion. Part of
>>>>>> religious freedom is the freedom of religious choice.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> A religion worthy of freedom would increase individual freedom.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> With freedom comes increased responsibility; with increased
>>>>>> responsibility comes increased freedom. By increasing freedoms for
>all
>>>>>> one's own freedoms are increased.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> “Constant and continual alertness is the price of freedom.
>>>>>> Constant willingness to fight back is the price of freedom.
>>>>>> There is no other price actually.”
>>>>>> — L. RON HUBBARD
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Rich Lamanna wrote:
>>>>>>> You can thank me for lighting the fire, you can all fan the flames.
>>> Why
>>>>> the
>>>>>>> heck not welcome some more illegals.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> http://www.canadafreepress.com/2007/paul-williams051107.htm
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> "Eternal vigilance is the price of liberty." -- Wendell Phillips
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> "No man is entitled to the blessings of freedom unless he be vigilant
>>> in
>>>>> its
>>>>>>> preservation." -- General Douglas MacArthur
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> "FREEDOM IS NOT FOR THE TIMID." -- posted as an announcement outside
>a
>>>>>>> Unitarian Church in Texas on Sept. 17, 2001
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> "In the beginning of a change the patriot is a scarce man, and brave,
>>>>> and
>>>>>>> hated
>>>>>>> and scorned. When his cause succeeds, the timid join him, for then
>it
>>>>> costs
>>>>>>> nothing
>>>>>>> to be a patriot." -- Mark Twain
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> "History does not long entrust the care of freedom to the weak or
>the
>>>>>>> timid."
>>>>>>> -- Dwight D. Eisenhower, First Inaugural Address, Jan. 20, 1953
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> "The future doesn't belong to the faint-hearted. It belongs to the
>>>>> brave."
>>>>>>> -- Ronald Reagan
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> "The battle, sir, is not to the strong alone; it is to the vigilant,
>>> the
>>>>>>> active,
>>>>>>> the brave." -- Patrick Henry
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> "The land of the free will cease to be when it's no longer the home
>of
>>>>>>> the brave."-- Rick Gaber
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> "Any 20 year-old who isn't a liberal doesn't have a heart,
>>>>>>> and any 40 year-old who isn't a conservative doesn't have a brain."
|
|
|
|
| Re: OT: Springtime in Islamberg. [message #84904 is a reply to message #84902] |
Mon, 21 May 2007 08:24 |
dc[3]
Messages: 895
Registered: September 2005
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Wait a minute here. Where did I say a WORD about Iraq?
Did you even read the previous posts?
amazing...
DC
Chas. Duncan <duncan5199ATsbcglobalDOTnet@> wrote:
>
>Afghanistan, yes: clear connection to originators of 9/11; Iraq, no:
>zero evidence then and now of even the slightest complicity in the
>attacks of Sept. 01. Take your "rubbish" out with the rest of your
>trash.
>
>--chas.
>
>On 21 May 2007 23:57:37 +1000, "DC" <dc@spammersinhell.com> wrote:
>
>>
>>Rubbish. That's like not blaming the Nazis for the beer hall putsch...
>>It was just those few lunatics...
>>
>>There's no difference in any way that matters, between the leadership of
>>the Mullahs in Afghanistan and the AQ's they harbored. And it was an
>>act of war. Period.
>>
>>DC
>>
>>Bill L <bill@billlorentzen.com> wrote:
>>>There is one salient difference between WWI & II and our wars in
>>>Afghanistan and Iraq. We did not start the WWs. We did start the recent
>>
>>>wars. You can't call 9/11 acts of war from those nations. They are acts
>>
>>>of vindictiveness from a tiny group of completely evil lunatic fringe
>>>players.
>>>
>>>Bill L
>>>
>>>
>>>Rich Lamanna wrote:
>>>>> To react to that, to conduct a "War Against Terrorism" is
>>>>> about as desperate and pathetic IMHO.
>>>>
>>>> Bill, it's not a war against terrorism, this is a misnomer. It is a
war
>>>> against "Radical Islamic Extremism" and their desire to impose an Islamic
>>>> theocratic caliphate on the free world.
>>>>
>>>>> And it's so uncreative and historically repetitive as to be a big dumb
>>>>> bore.
>>>>
>>>> We defeated Japan and Germany and they're not the worst allies. Come
to
>>>> think of it, we bailed out the French in WW2 and what the hell did we
>>get in
>>>> return, Chirac? Maybe now, however, with Nicolas Sarkozy we'll be better
>>>> thought of.
>>>>
>>>> Rich
>>>>
>>>> 'Any 20 year-old who isn't a liberal doesn't have a heart,
>>>> and any 40 year-old who isn't a conservative doesn't have a brain.'
-
>>>> Winston Churchill
>>>>
>>>> "Bill L" <bill@billlorentzen.com> wrote in message news:464e6433@linux...
>>>>> It was too early when I wrote that.
>>>>>
>>>>> Look, it's a thorny issue. The point I was trying to make is I support
>>>>> the freedom of those religions that grant others the same freedom.
I
>>>>> don't support freedom of a religion that is trying to curtail freedom,
>>>>> you dig?
>>>>>
>>>>> We have to take responsibility for mis-guided people just the way one
>>>>> does for a child. With a small child, you don't get angry and punish
>>him
>>>>> or her for making a bad choice. You exert calm, confident control and
>>>>> direct it towards the right choice. We have to be bigger than them,
and
>>>>> not react angrily to their desperate attempts to cause an effect on
us.
>>>>> Think how pathetically desperate a group must be if the only way they
>>>>> can dream up to communicate is through terrorism. That is quite
>>>>> pathetic.>
>>>> Just think how much more effective and creative it would have been
>>>>> to spend a few billion dollars to simply buy access to the terrorists
>>>>> and then put them away. Very little collateral damage. The people who
>>>>> stand up for freedom by denouncing the terrorists get rich as they
>>>>> deserve for their bravery and everybody else lives happier, free-er
lives.
>>>>>
>>>>> I know some will say it would never work like that, but did anyone
ever
>>>> try?
>>>>> Bill
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Rich Lamanna wrote:
>>>>>> Bill, I have no problem with freedom, you infidel :-) I am a
>>>>>> constitutionalist and believe strongly in the 1st amendment.
>>>> Unfortunately
>>>>>> the radical Islamic doesn't cherish those same freedoms you and I
hold
>>>>>> dearly. They are willing to die to impose their fascism and intolerant
>>>>>> theocratic rubbish upon us.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Remember Waco. The ATF, under the administration of Clinton and Janet
>>>>>> Sterno, stormed the Branch Davidian home, in Rambo fashion, to serve
>>a
>>>>>> search warrant issued on the suspicion that the group was stockpiling
>>>>>> automatic weapons, massacring almost 100 hundred men, women, and
>>>> children.
>>>>>> But I doubt that the FBI or ATF would ever raid these holy men, oh
God
>>>> no,
>>>>>> despite the fact that they are irrefutably armed to the teeth and
>>>> practicing
>>>>>> for violent Jihad.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Did you read the article dude? Did you read the part about the violent
>>>>>> incidents involving Jamaat Ul Fuora in the US?
>>>>>> "By 2004 federal investigators uncovered evidence that linked both
the
>>>> DC
>>>>>> "sniper killer" John Allen Muhammed and "Shoe Bomber" Richard Reid
to
>>>> the
>>>>>> group and reports surfaced that Wall Street Journal reporter Daniel
>>>> Pearl
>>>>>> was captured and beheaded in the process of attempting to obtain an
>>>>>> interview with Sheikh Gilani in Pakistan."
>>>>>>
>>>>>> http://www.canadafreepress.com/images/paul-williams-map-larg e.jpg
>>>>>>
>>>>>> What were Koresh and the Davidians guilty of? Maybe of being Christians.
>>>>>> Nothing compared to this group. Wake up man, this is not about freedom
>>>> of
>>>>>> religion this is about a Jihad threatening our existence and the choice
>>>> to
>>>>>> exercise any freedoms let alone freedom of religion. We had better
keep
>>>> an
>>>>>> eye on these guys.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Rich
>>>>>>
>>>>>> From my cold dead hands - Charlton Heston
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> "Bill L" <bill@billlorentzen.com> wrote in message
>>>> news:464d8d4f@linux...
>>>>>>> I strongly support freedom, especially freedom of religion. Part
of
>>>>>>> religious freedom is the freedom of religious choice.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> A religion worthy of freedom would increase individual freedom.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> With freedom comes increased responsibility; with increased
>>>>>>> responsibility comes increased freedom. By increasing freedoms for
>>all
>>>>>>> one's own freedoms are increased.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> “Constant and continual alertness is the price of freedom.
>>>>>>> Constant willingness to fight back is the price of freedom.
>>>>>>> There is no other price actually.”
>>>>>>> — L. RON HUBBARD
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Rich Lamanna wrote:
>>>>>>>> You can thank me for lighting the fire, you can all fan the flames.
>>>> Why
>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>> heck not welcome some more illegals.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> http://www.canadafreepress.com/2007/paul-williams051107.htm
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> "Eternal vigilance is the price of liberty." -- Wendell Phillips
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> "No man is entitled to the blessings of freedom unless he be vigilant
>>>> in
>>>>>> its
>>>>>>>> preservation." -- General Douglas MacArthur
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> "FREEDOM IS NOT FOR THE TIMID." -- posted as an announcement outside
>>a
>>>>>>>> Unitarian Church in Texas on Sept. 17, 2001
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> "In the beginning of a change the patriot is a scarce man, and brave,
>>>>>> and
>>>>>>>> hated
>>>>>>>> and scorned. When his cause succeeds, the timid join him, for then
>>it
>>>>>> costs
>>>>>>>> nothing
>>>>>>>> to be a patriot." -- Mark Twain
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> "History does not long entrust the care of freedom to the weak
or
>>the
>>>>>>>> timid."
>>>>>>>> -- Dwight D. Eisenhower, First Inaugural Address, Jan. 20, 1953
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> "The future doesn't belong to the faint-hearted. It belongs to
the
>>>>>> brave."
>>>>>>>> -- Ronald Reagan
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> "The battle, sir, is not to the strong alone; it is to the vigilant,
>>>> the
>>>>>>>> active,
>>>>>>>> the brave." -- Patrick Henry
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> "The land of the free will cease to be when it's no longer the home
>>of
>>>>>>>> the brave."-- Rick Gaber
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> "Any 20 year-old who isn't a liberal doesn't have a heart,
>>>>>>>> and any 40 year-old who isn't a conservative doesn't have a brain."
>
|
|
|
|
| Re: OT: Springtime in Islamberg. [message #84906 is a reply to message #84904] |
Mon, 21 May 2007 09:44 |
duncan
Messages: 123
Registered: November 2006
|
Senior Member |
|
|
"Amazing" only if you don't bother to read the entire first sentence
of Bill's post to which your response began with this word "Rubbish."
What's "amazing" to me is that you're so easily amazed.
chas.
On 22 May 2007 01:24:53 +1000, "DC" <dc@spammersinhell.com> wrote:
>
>Wait a minute here. Where did I say a WORD about Iraq?
>Did you even read the previous posts?
>
>amazing...
>
>DC
>
>
>Chas. Duncan <duncan5199ATsbcglobalDOTnet@> wrote:
>>
>>Afghanistan, yes: clear connection to originators of 9/11; Iraq, no:
>>zero evidence then and now of even the slightest complicity in the
>>attacks of Sept. 01. Take your "rubbish" out with the rest of your
>>trash.
>>
>>--chas.
>>
>>On 21 May 2007 23:57:37 +1000, "DC" <dc@spammersinhell.com> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>Rubbish. That's like not blaming the Nazis for the beer hall putsch...
>>>It was just those few lunatics...
>>>
>>>There's no difference in any way that matters, between the leadership of
>>>the Mullahs in Afghanistan and the AQ's they harbored. And it was an
>>>act of war. Period.
>>>
>>>DC
>>>
>>>Bill L <bill@billlorentzen.com> wrote:
>>>>There is one salient difference between WWI & II and our wars in
>>>>Afghanistan and Iraq. We did not start the WWs. We did start the recent
>>>
>>>>wars. You can't call 9/11 acts of war from those nations. They are acts
>>>
>>>>of vindictiveness from a tiny group of completely evil lunatic fringe
>
>>>>players.
>>>>
>>>>Bill L
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>Rich Lamanna wrote:
>>>>>> To react to that, to conduct a "War Against Terrorism" is
>>>>>> about as desperate and pathetic IMHO.
>>>>>
>>>>> Bill, it's not a war against terrorism, this is a misnomer. It is a
>war
>>>>> against "Radical Islamic Extremism" and their desire to impose an Islamic
>>>>> theocratic caliphate on the free world.
>>>>>
>>>>>> And it's so uncreative and historically repetitive as to be a big dumb
>>>>>> bore.
>>>>>
>>>>> We defeated Japan and Germany and they're not the worst allies. Come
>to
>>>>> think of it, we bailed out the French in WW2 and what the hell did we
>>>get in
>>>>> return, Chirac? Maybe now, however, with Nicolas Sarkozy we'll be better
>>>>> thought of.
>>>>>
>>>>> Rich
>>>>>
>>>>> 'Any 20 year-old who isn't a liberal doesn't have a heart,
>>>>> and any 40 year-old who isn't a conservative doesn't have a brain.'
>-
>>>>> Winston Churchill
>>>>>
>>>>> "Bill L" <bill@billlorentzen.com> wrote in message news:464e6433@linux...
>>>>>> It was too early when I wrote that.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Look, it's a thorny issue. The point I was trying to make is I support
>>>>>> the freedom of those religions that grant others the same freedom.
>I
>>>>>> don't support freedom of a religion that is trying to curtail freedom,
>>>>>> you dig?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> We have to take responsibility for mis-guided people just the way one
>>>>>> does for a child. With a small child, you don't get angry and punish
>>>him
>>>>>> or her for making a bad choice. You exert calm, confident control and
>>>>>> direct it towards the right choice. We have to be bigger than them,
>and
>>>>>> not react angrily to their desperate attempts to cause an effect on
>us.
>>>>>> Think how pathetically desperate a group must be if the only way they
>>>>>> can dream up to communicate is through terrorism. That is quite
>>>>>> pathetic.>
>>>>> Just think how much more effective and creative it would have been
>>>>>> to spend a few billion dollars to simply buy access to the terrorists
>>>>>> and then put them away. Very little collateral damage. The people who
>>>>>> stand up for freedom by denouncing the terrorists get rich as they
>>>>>> deserve for their bravery and everybody else lives happier, free-er
>lives.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I know some will say it would never work like that, but did anyone
>ever
>>>>> try?
>>>>>> Bill
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Rich Lamanna wrote:
>>>>>>> Bill, I have no problem with freedom, you infidel :-) I am a
>>>>>>> constitutionalist and believe strongly in the 1st amendment.
>>>>> Unfortunately
>>>>>>> the radical Islamic doesn't cherish those same freedoms you and I
>hold
>>>>>>> dearly. They are willing to die to impose their fascism and intolerant
>>>>>>> theocratic rubbish upon us.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Remember Waco. The ATF, under the administration of Clinton and Janet
>>>>>>> Sterno, stormed the Branch Davidian home, in Rambo fashion, to serve
>>>a
>>>>>>> search warrant issued on the suspicion that the group was stockpiling
>>>>>>> automatic weapons, massacring almost 100 hundred men, women, and
>>>>> children.
>>>>>>> But I doubt that the FBI or ATF would ever raid these holy men, oh
>God
>>>>> no,
>>>>>>> despite the fact that they are irrefutably armed to the teeth and
>>>>> practicing
>>>>>>> for violent Jihad.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Did you read the article dude? Did you read the part about the violent
>>>>>>> incidents involving Jamaat Ul Fuora in the US?
>>>>>>> "By 2004 federal investigators uncovered evidence that linked both
>the
>>>>> DC
>>>>>>> "sniper killer" John Allen Muhammed and "Shoe Bomber" Richard Reid
>to
>>>>> the
>>>>>>> group and reports surfaced that Wall Street Journal reporter Daniel
>>>>> Pearl
>>>>>>> was captured and beheaded in the process of attempting to obtain an
>>>>>>> interview with Sheikh Gilani in Pakistan."
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> http://www.canadafreepress.com/images/paul-williams-map-larg e.jpg
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> What were Koresh and the Davidians guilty of? Maybe of being Christians.
>>>>>>> Nothing compared to this group. Wake up man, this is not about freedom
>>>>> of
>>>>>>> religion this is about a Jihad threatening our existence and the choice
>>>>> to
>>>>>>> exercise any freedoms let alone freedom of religion. We had better
>keep
>>>>> an
>>>>>>> eye on these guys.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Rich
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> From my cold dead hands - Charlton Heston
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> "Bill L" <bill@billlorentzen.com> wrote in message
>>>>> news:464d8d4f@linux...
>>>>>>>> I strongly support freedom, especially freedom of religion. Part
>of
>>>>>>>> religious freedom is the freedom of religious choice.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> A religion worthy of freedom would increase individual freedom.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> With freedom comes increased responsibility; with increased
>>>>>>>> responsibility comes increased freedom. By increasing freedoms for
>>>all
>>>>>>>> one's own freedoms are increased.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> “Constant and continual alertness is the price of freedom.
>>>>>>>> Constant willingness to fight back is the price of freedom.
>>>>>>>> There is no other price actually.”
>>>>>>>> — L. RON HUBBARD
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Rich Lamanna wrote:
>>>>>>>>> You can thank me for lighting the fire, you can all fan the flames.
>>>>> Why
>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>> heck not welcome some more illegals.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> http://www.canadafreepress.com/2007/paul-williams051107.htm
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> "Eternal vigilance is the price of liberty." -- Wendell Phillips
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> "No man is entitled to the blessings of freedom unless he be vigilant
>>>>> in
>>>>>>> its
>>>>>>>>> preservation." -- General Douglas MacArthur
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> "FREEDOM IS NOT FOR THE TIMID." -- posted as an announcement outside
>>>a
>>>>>>>>> Unitarian Church in Texas on Sept. 17, 2001
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> "In the beginning of a change the patriot is a scarce man, and brave,
>>>>>>> and
>>>>>>>>> hated
>>>>>>>>> and scorned. When his cause succeeds, the timid join him, for then
>>>it
>>>>>>> costs
>>>>>>>>> nothing
>>>>>>>>> to be a patriot." -- Mark Twain
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> "History does not long entrust the care of freedom to the weak
>or
>>>the
>>>>>>>>> timid."
>>>>>>>>> -- Dwight D. Eisenhower, First Inaugural Address, Jan. 20, 1953
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> "The future doesn't belong to the faint-hearted. It belongs to
>the
>>>>>>> brave."
>>>>>>>>> -- Ronald Reagan
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> "The battle, sir, is not to the strong alone; it is to the vigilant,
>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>> active,
>>>>>>>>> the brave." -- Patrick Henry
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> "The land of the free will cease to be when it's no longer the home
>>>of
>>>>>>>>> the brave."-- Rick Gaber
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> "Any 20 year-old who isn't a liberal doesn't have a heart,
>>>>>>>>> and any 40 year-old who isn't a conservative doesn't have a brain."
>>
|
|
|
|
| Re: Springtime in Islamberg. [message #84909 is a reply to message #84850] |
Mon, 21 May 2007 09:08 |
TCB
Messages: 1261
Registered: July 2007
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Clinton isn't even close to being worst. Worst is Woodrow Wilson by a mile
and pulling away. The second tier of awfulness is kind of a three way tie
in my mind, McKinley (for the Spanish American War), van Buren (who was an
excellent statesman, just a horrible president) and perhaps Zachary Taylor.
One could argue that Jefferson's second presidency was the single worst term,
but his first was such a massive success we can't put him in the bad list.
Besides, Jefferson was into hot babes and good French wine so how can I argue
with that?
Bush the Younger? Jury is still out, but the Iraq war is _by far_ the greatest
foreign policy blunder in US history. It combines the mendacity of McKinley's
war with the arrogance of Kennedy's war (I put Vietnam more on him than most)
and it's draped in the Wilsonian drivel that got us into WW I. And the US
will suffer its repercussions until long after I'm dead.
TCB
"DJ" <www.aarrrrggghhh!!!.com> wrote:
>
>
>I definitely believe this. The whole reason we are in Iraq and =
>Afghanistan right now is because of Clinton's criminal ineptitude. You =
>can be assured that I believe that clinton was, without a doubt, "^The =
>worst" president in american history, bar none.
>
>;o)
>
> "Sarah" <sarahjane@sarahtonin.com> wrote in message =
>news:465015b5$1@linux...
> Sorry, I don't believe you. I'm sure you're making a point, but I =
>don't believe you really think that.
>
> Sorry. :)
>
> SJB
> "DJ" <www.aarrrrggghhh!!!.com> wrote in message =
>news:464f1633@linux...
>
> "
> Here's what I think history will tell us: this was the most =
>corrupt and destructive administration in US history, and the damage =
>they did took years to recover from. (I'm optimistic)
>
> Just my opinion. I could be wrong.
>
> Naaaa! :)
>
> S
>
>
>
>
> I think that theis perfectly describes the Clinton administration.
>
> go figure......
>
><!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
><HTML><HEAD>
><META http-equiv=3DContent-Type content=3D"text/html; =
>charset=3Diso-8859-1">
><META content=3D"MSHTML 6.00.6000.16414" name=3DGENERATOR>
><STYLE></STYLE>
></HEAD>
><BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
><DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>I definitely believe this. The whole =
>reason we are=20
>in Iraq and Afghanistan right now is because of Clinton's criminal =
>ineptitude.=20
>You can be assured that I believe that clinton was, without a doubt, =
>"^The=20
>worst" president in american history, bar none.</FONT></DIV>
><DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
><DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>;o)</FONT></DIV>
><DIV> </DIV>
><BLOCKQUOTE dir=3Dltr=20
>style=3D"PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; =
>BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
> <DIV>"Sarah" <<A=20
> =
>href=3D"mailto:sarahjane@sarahtonin.com">sarahjane@sarahtonin.com</A>>=
> wrote=20
> in message <A =
>href=3D"news:465015b5$1@linux">news:465015b5$1@linux</A>...</DIV>
> <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Sorry, I don't believe you. I'm =
>sure you're=20
> making a point, but I don't believe you really think =
>that.</FONT></DIV>
> <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
> <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Sorry. :)</FONT></DIV>
> <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
> <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>SJB</FONT></DIV>
> <BLOCKQUOTE dir=3Dltr=20
> style=3D"PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; =
>BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
> <DIV>"DJ" <<A=20
> =
>href=3D"http://www.aarrrrggghhh!!!.com">www.aarrrrggghhh!!!.com</A>> =
>wrote=20
> in message <A =
>href=3D"news:464f1633@linux">news:464f1633@linux</A>...</DIV>
> <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
> <BLOCKQUOTE dir=3Dltr=20
> style=3D"PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; =
>BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
> <DIV>"<FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT></DIV>
> <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Here's what I think history will
=
>tell=20
> us: this was the most corrupt and destructive administration =
>in US=20
> history, and the damage they did took years to recover from. =
>(I'm=20
> optimistic)</FONT></DIV>
> <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
> <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Just my opinion. I could be =
>
> wrong.</FONT></DIV>
> <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
> <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Naaaa! :)</FONT></DIV>
> <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
> <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>S</FONT></DIV>
> <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
> <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
> <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
> <DIV>
> <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
> <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>I think that theis perfectly =
>describes the=20
> Clinton administration.</FONT></DIV>
> <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
> <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>go=20
> =
>figure......</FONT></DIV></DIV></BLOCKQUOTE></BLOCKQUOTE ></BLOCKQUOTE></B=
>ODY></HTML>
>
>
|
|
|
|
| Re: OT: Springtime in Islamberg. [message #84913 is a reply to message #84906] |
Mon, 21 May 2007 09:33 |
dc[3]
Messages: 895
Registered: September 2005
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Pay attention.
Bill L <bill@billlorentzen.com> wrote:
There is one salient difference between WWI & II and our wars in
Afghanistan and Iraq. We did not start the WWs. We did start the recent
wars
He is claiming that it was a small group within the countries that
did it, and it was not an act of war.
In the case of Afghanistan, that is clearly not the case. That is what I
said. You brought up Iraq and tried to conflate the two.
You got caught.
Now, if you want to make a case about Iraq, go ahead.
DC
Chas. Duncan <duncan5199ATsbcglobalDOTnet@> wrote:
>"Amazing" only if you don't bother to read the entire first sentence
>of Bill's post to which your response began with this word "Rubbish."
>
>What's "amazing" to me is that you're so easily amazed.
>
>chas.
>
>
>
>On 22 May 2007 01:24:53 +1000, "DC" <dc@spammersinhell.com> wrote:
>
>>
>>Wait a minute here. Where did I say a WORD about Iraq?
>>Did you even read the previous posts?
>>
>>amazing...
>>
>>DC
>>
>>
>>Chas. Duncan <duncan5199ATsbcglobalDOTnet@> wrote:
>>>
>>>Afghanistan, yes: clear connection to originators of 9/11; Iraq, no:
>>>zero evidence then and now of even the slightest complicity in the
>>>attacks of Sept. 01. Take your "rubbish" out with the rest of your
>>>trash.
>>>
>>>--chas.
>>>
>>>On 21 May 2007 23:57:37 +1000, "DC" <dc@spammersinhell.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>>Rubbish. That's like not blaming the Nazis for the beer hall putsch...
>>>>It was just those few lunatics...
>>>>
>>>>There's no difference in any way that matters, between the leadership
of
>>>>the Mullahs in Afghanistan and the AQ's they harbored. And it was an
>>>>act of war. Period.
>>>>
>>>>DC
>>>>
>>>>Bill L <bill@billlorentzen.com> wrote:
>>>>>There is one salient difference between WWI & II and our wars in
>>>>>Afghanistan and Iraq. We did not start the WWs. We did start the recent
>>>>
>>>>>wars. You can't call 9/11 acts of war from those nations. They are acts
>>>>
>>>>>of vindictiveness from a tiny group of completely evil lunatic fringe
>>
>>>>>players.
>>>>>
>>>>>Bill L
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>Rich Lamanna wrote:
>>>>>>> To react to that, to conduct a "War Against Terrorism" is
>>>>>>> about as desperate and pathetic IMHO.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Bill, it's not a war against terrorism, this is a misnomer. It is
a
>>war
>>>>>> against "Radical Islamic Extremism" and their desire to impose an
Islamic
>>>>>> theocratic caliphate on the free world.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> And it's so uncreative and historically repetitive as to be a big
dumb
>>>>>>> bore.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> We defeated Japan and Germany and they're not the worst allies. Come
>>to
>>>>>> think of it, we bailed out the French in WW2 and what the hell did
we
>>>>get in
>>>>>> return, Chirac? Maybe now, however, with Nicolas Sarkozy we'll be
better
>>>>>> thought of.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Rich
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 'Any 20 year-old who isn't a liberal doesn't have a heart,
>>>>>> and any 40 year-old who isn't a conservative doesn't have a brain.'
>>-
>>>>>> Winston Churchill
>>>>>>
>>>>>> "Bill L" <bill@billlorentzen.com> wrote in message news:464e6433@linux...
>>>>>>> It was too early when I wrote that.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Look, it's a thorny issue. The point I was trying to make is I support
>>>>>>> the freedom of those religions that grant others the same freedom.
>>I
>>>>>>> don't support freedom of a religion that is trying to curtail freedom,
>>>>>>> you dig?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> We have to take responsibility for mis-guided people just the way
one
>>>>>>> does for a child. With a small child, you don't get angry and punish
>>>>him
>>>>>>> or her for making a bad choice. You exert calm, confident control
and
>>>>>>> direct it towards the right choice. We have to be bigger than them,
>>and
>>>>>>> not react angrily to their desperate attempts to cause an effect
on
>>us.
>>>>>>> Think how pathetically desperate a group must be if the only way
they
>>>>>>> can dream up to communicate is through terrorism. That is quite
>>>>>>> pathetic.>
>>>>>> Just think how much more effective and creative it would have been
>>>>>>> to spend a few billion dollars to simply buy access to the terrorists
>>>>>>> and then put them away. Very little collateral damage. The people
who
>>>>>>> stand up for freedom by denouncing the terrorists get rich as they
>>>>>>> deserve for their bravery and everybody else lives happier, free-er
>>lives.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I know some will say it would never work like that, but did anyone
>>ever
>>>>>> try?
>>>>>>> Bill
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Rich Lamanna wrote:
>>>>>>>> Bill, I have no problem with freedom, you infidel :-) I am a
>>>>>>>> constitutionalist and believe strongly in the 1st amendment.
>>>>>> Unfortunately
>>>>>>>> the radical Islamic doesn't cherish those same freedoms you and
I
>>hold
>>>>>>>> dearly. They are willing to die to impose their fascism and intolerant
>>>>>>>> theocratic rubbish upon us.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Remember Waco. The ATF, under the administration of Clinton and
Janet
>>>>>>>> Sterno, stormed the Branch Davidian home, in Rambo fashion, to serve
>>>>a
>>>>>>>> search warrant issued on the suspicion that the group was stockpiling
>>>>>>>> automatic weapons, massacring almost 100 hundred men, women, and
>>>>>> children.
>>>>>>>> But I doubt that the FBI or ATF would ever raid these holy men,
oh
>>God
>>>>>> no,
>>>>>>>> despite the fact that they are irrefutably armed to the teeth and
>>>>>> practicing
>>>>>>>> for violent Jihad.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Did you read the article dude? Did you read the part about the violent
>>>>>>>> incidents involving Jamaat Ul Fuora in the US?
>>>>>>>> "By 2004 federal investigators uncovered evidence that linked both
>>the
>>>>>> DC
>>>>>>>> "sniper killer" John Allen Muhammed and "Shoe Bomber" Richard Reid
>>to
>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>> group and reports surfaced that Wall Street Journal reporter Daniel
>>>>>> Pearl
>>>>>>>> was captured and beheaded in the process of attempting to obtain
an
>>>>>>>> interview with Sheikh Gilani in Pakistan."
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> http://www.canadafreepress.com/images/paul-williams-map-larg e.jpg
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> What were Koresh and the Davidians guilty of? Maybe of being Christians.
>>>>>>>> Nothing compared to this group. Wake up man, this is not about freedom
>>>>>> of
>>>>>>>> religion this is about a Jihad threatening our existence and the
choice
>>>>>> to
>>>>>>>> exercise any freedoms let alone freedom of religion. We had better
>>keep
>>>>>> an
>>>>>>>> eye on these guys.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Rich
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> From my cold dead hands - Charlton Heston
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> "Bill L" <bill@billlorentzen.com> wrote in message
>>>>>> news:464d8d4f@linux...
>>>>>>>>> I strongly support freedom, especially freedom of religion. Part
>>of
>>>>>>>>> religious freedom is the freedom of religious choice.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> A religion worthy of freedom would increase individual freedom.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> With freedom comes increased responsibility; with increased
>>>>>>>>> responsibility comes increased freedom. By increasing freedoms
for
>>>>all
>>>>>>>>> one's own freedoms are increased.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> “Constant and continual alertness is the price of freedom.
>>>>>>>>> Constant willingness to fight back is the price of freedom.
>>>>>>>>> There is no other price actually.”
>>>>>>>>> — L. RON HUBBARD
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Rich Lamanna wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> You can thank me for lighting the fire, you can all fan the flames.
>>>>>> Why
>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>>> heck not welcome some more illegals.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> http://www.canadafreepress.com/2007/paul-williams051107.htm
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> "Eternal vigilance is the price of liberty." -- Wendell Phillips
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> "No man is entitled to the blessings of freedom unless he be vigilant
>>>>>> in
>>>>>>>> its
>>>>>>>>>> preservation." -- General Douglas MacArthur
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> "FREEDOM IS NOT FOR THE TIMID." -- posted as an announcement outside
>>>>a
>>>>>>>>>> Unitarian Church in Texas on Sept. 17, 2001
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> "In the beginning of a change the patriot is a scarce man, and
brave,
>>>>>>>> and
>>>>>>>>>> hated
>>>>>>>>>> and scorned. When his cause succeeds, the timid join him, for
then
>>>>it
>>>>>>>> costs
>>>>>>>>>> nothing
>>>>>>>>>> to be a patriot." -- Mark Twain
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> "History does not long entrust the care of freedom to the weak
>>or
>>>>the
>>>>>>>>>> timid."
>>>>>>>>>> -- Dwight D. Eisenhower, First Inaugural Address, Jan. 20, 1953
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> "The future doesn't belong to the faint-hearted. It belongs to
>>the
>>>>>>>> brave."
>>>>>>>>>> -- Ronald Reagan
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> "The battle, sir, is not to the strong alone; it is to the vigilant,
>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>>> active,
>>>>>>>>>> the brave." -- Patrick Henry
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> "The land of the free will cease to be when it's no longer the
home
>>>>of
>>>>>>>>>> the brave."-- Rick Gaber
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> "Any 20 year-old who isn't a liberal doesn't have a heart,
>>>>>>>>>> and any 40 year-old who isn't a conservative doesn't have a brain."
>>>
>
|
|
|
|
| Re: Springtime in Islamberg. [message #84921 is a reply to message #84889] |
Mon, 21 May 2007 10:54 |
dc[3]
Messages: 895
Registered: September 2005
|
Senior Member |
|
|
"ulfiyya" <ulfiyya@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>I thenk better to change to name of this site!
>I thought that this is a Paris forum site,not a political site
>Greets,
yeah, I know what you mean, but really it has become a group
of people who actually do like each other most of the time and
usually get along despite our differences.
Being that we consider ourselves a bit of a community, we
feel free to discuss this stuff.
Which of course brings up another problem...
It's like the prison joke? You know the one where everyone
has heard all the jokes so they just give them numbers?
(I forget the rest of the joke... anyone?)
They don't TELL the jokes anymore, they just call out the
number and they are all so bored that everyone still laughs.
So, why don't we assign numbers to all the possible positions
on political issues, and just call the numbers out?
It would save a lot of typing, and hell, using Paris IS a bit like
being in prison innit?
DC
|
|
|
|
| Re: OT: Springtime in Islamberg. [message #84931 is a reply to message #84891] |
Mon, 21 May 2007 13:42 |
TCB
Messages: 1261
Registered: July 2007
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Point of order. We weren't attacked in WW I, at least not in any militarily
significant way. We were actively supporting the British and (to a lesser
degree) the French. The Germans (in both wars) desperately wanted the US
on the sidelines, but decided in WW I they couldn't tolerate the amount of
arms and supplies the US was providing. But the Lusitania was hardly a massive
attack on the US.
In WW II we were attacked, but despite what you learned in history class
it was a very complex thing. The US had been 'negotiating' for peace with
imperial Japan, and doing so in extremely bad faith. Sentiment in the US
was wildly anti-war, polls show over 80% of the public were against the US
entering the war, and Roosevelt had campaigned promising that the US would
not enter the war unless attacked. He clearly wanted war and had given the
Japanese an ultimatum that everyone knew was a complete non-starter. There
were parts of the Japanese military/bureaucracy that were for attacking the
US, there were parts that were virulently against it. We don't know what
would have happened, but the US ultimatum made the war party's line look
like the only defensible one. Personally I think Roosevelt wanted the war
but didn't imagine the Japanese could pull off something as devastating as
Pearl Harbor. I think he was looking for a 'Lusitania in the Pacific.' Also,
US cargo ships headed for England were being guarded by US Navy convoys even
before the US entered the war, which is the kind of thing that usually turns
a country from neutral to participating pretty quickly.
As far as Afghanistan, it's hard to say. On the one hand the Taliban clearly
were providing al-Queda with a safe haven which is a massive operational
gift to a non-state actor. That said, one could argue that Pakistan (operations,
training) and Saudi Arabia (money, recruits) were as responsible. But Afghanistan
doesn't have a trillion in US treasuries sitting in our banks. One could
go further and suggest that the US should have attacked the US, as it was
our funding, training and support that _made_ both the Taliban and al-Queda
when the CIA decided to 'give Russia their Vietnam' after the Soviets invaded
in 1979. Or, as one person says in Charlie Wilson's War, 'Nobody fucks with
the Afghans and gets away with it.'
Iraq? A pure, simple war of aggression, for which history will judge us grimly.
TCB
Bill L <bill@billlorentzen.com> wrote:
>There is one salient difference between WWI & II and our wars in
>Afghanistan and Iraq. We did not start the WWs. We did start the recent
>wars. You can't call 9/11 acts of war from those nations. They are acts
>of vindictiveness from a tiny group of completely evil lunatic fringe
>players.
>
>Bill L
>
>
>Rich Lamanna wrote:
>>> To react to that, to conduct a "War Against Terrorism" is
>>> about as desperate and pathetic IMHO.
>>
>> Bill, it's not a war against terrorism, this is a misnomer. It is a war
>> against "Radical Islamic Extremism" and their desire to impose an Islamic
>> theocratic caliphate on the free world.
>>
>>> And it's so uncreative and historically repetitive as to be a big dumb
>>> bore.
>>
>> We defeated Japan and Germany and they're not the worst allies. Come to
>> think of it, we bailed out the French in WW2 and what the hell did we
get in
>> return, Chirac? Maybe now, however, with Nicolas Sarkozy we'll be better
>> thought of.
>>
>> Rich
>>
>> 'Any 20 year-old who isn't a liberal doesn't have a heart,
>> and any 40 year-old who isn't a conservative doesn't have a brain.' -
>> Winston Churchill
>>
>> "Bill L" <bill@billlorentzen.com> wrote in message news:464e6433@linux...
>>> It was too early when I wrote that.
>>>
>>> Look, it's a thorny issue. The point I was trying to make is I support
>>> the freedom of those religions that grant others the same freedom. I
>>> don't support freedom of a religion that is trying to curtail freedom,
>>> you dig?
>>>
>>> We have to take responsibility for mis-guided people just the way one
>>> does for a child. With a small child, you don't get angry and punish
him
>>> or her for making a bad choice. You exert calm, confident control and
>>> direct it towards the right choice. We have to be bigger than them, and
>>> not react angrily to their desperate attempts to cause an effect on us.
>>> Think how pathetically desperate a group must be if the only way they
>>> can dream up to communicate is through terrorism. That is quite
>>> pathetic.>
>> Just think how much more effective and creative it would have been
>>> to spend a few billion dollars to simply buy access to the terrorists
>>> and then put them away. Very little collateral damage. The people who
>>> stand up for freedom by denouncing the terrorists get rich as they
>>> deserve for their bravery and everybody else lives happier, free-er lives.
>>>
>>> I know some will say it would never work like that, but did anyone ever
>> try?
>>> Bill
>>>
>>>
>>> Rich Lamanna wrote:
>>>> Bill, I have no problem with freedom, you infidel :-) I am a
>>>> constitutionalist and believe strongly in the 1st amendment.
>> Unfortunately
>>>> the radical Islamic doesn't cherish those same freedoms you and I hold
>>>> dearly. They are willing to die to impose their fascism and intolerant
>>>> theocratic rubbish upon us.
>>>>
>>>> Remember Waco. The ATF, under the administration of Clinton and Janet
>>>> Sterno, stormed the Branch Davidian home, in Rambo fashion, to serve
a
>>>> search warrant issued on the suspicion that the group was stockpiling
>>>> automatic weapons, massacring almost 100 hundred men, women, and
>> children.
>>>> But I doubt that the FBI or ATF would ever raid these holy men, oh God
>> no,
>>>> despite the fact that they are irrefutably armed to the teeth and
>> practicing
>>>> for violent Jihad.
>>>>
>>>> Did you read the article dude? Did you read the part about the violent
>>>> incidents involving Jamaat Ul Fuora in the US?
>>>> "By 2004 federal investigators uncovered evidence that linked both the
>> DC
>>>> "sniper killer" John Allen Muhammed and "Shoe Bomber" Richard Reid to
>> the
>>>> group and reports surfaced that Wall Street Journal reporter Daniel
>> Pearl
>>>> was captured and beheaded in the process of attempting to obtain an
>>>> interview with Sheikh Gilani in Pakistan."
>>>>
>>>> http://www.canadafreepress.com/images/paul-williams-map-larg e.jpg
>>>>
>>>> What were Koresh and the Davidians guilty of? Maybe of being Christians.
>>>> Nothing compared to this group. Wake up man, this is not about freedom
>> of
>>>> religion this is about a Jihad threatening our existence and the choice
>> to
>>>> exercise any freedoms let alone freedom of religion. We had better keep
>> an
>>>> eye on these guys.
>>>>
>>>> Rich
>>>>
>>>> From my cold dead hands - Charlton Heston
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> "Bill L" <bill@billlorentzen.com> wrote in message
>> news:464d8d4f@linux...
>>>>> I strongly support freedom, especially freedom of religion. Part of
>>>>> religious freedom is the freedom of religious choice.
>>>>>
>>>>> A religion worthy of freedom would increase individual freedom.
>>>>>
>>>>> With freedom comes increased responsibility; with increased
>>>>> responsibility comes increased freedom. By increasing freedoms for
all
>>>>> one's own freedoms are increased.
>>>>>
>>>>> “Constant and continual alertness is the price of freedom.
>>>>> Constant willingness to fight back is the price of freedom.
>>>>> There is no other price actually.”
>>>>> — L. RON HUBBARD
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Rich Lamanna wrote:
>>>>>> You can thank me for lighting the fire, you can all fan the flames.
>> Why
>>>> the
>>>>>> heck not welcome some more illegals.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> http://www.canadafreepress.com/2007/paul-williams051107.htm
>>>>>>
>>>>>> "Eternal vigilance is the price of liberty." -- Wendell Phillips
>>>>>>
>>>>>> "No man is entitled to the blessings of freedom unless he be vigilant
>> in
>>>> its
>>>>>> preservation." -- General Douglas MacArthur
>>>>>>
>>>>>> "FREEDOM IS NOT FOR THE TIMID." -- posted as an announcement outside
a
>>>>>> Unitarian Church in Texas on Sept. 17, 2001
>>>>>>
>>>>>> "In the beginning of a change the patriot is a scarce man, and brave,
>>>> and
>>>>>> hated
>>>>>> and scorned. When his cause succeeds, the timid join him, for then
it
>>>> costs
>>>>>> nothing
>>>>>> to be a patriot." -- Mark Twain
>>>>>>
>>>>>> "History does not long entrust the care of freedom to the weak or
the
>>>>>> timid."
>>>>>> -- Dwight D. Eisenhower, First Inaugural Address, Jan. 20, 1953
>>>>>>
>>>>>> "The future doesn't belong to the faint-hearted. It belongs to the
>>>> brave."
>>>>>> -- Ronald Reagan
>>>>>>
>>>>>> "The battle, sir, is not to the strong alone; it is to the vigilant,
>> the
>>>>>> active,
>>>>>> the brave." -- Patrick Henry
>>>>>>
>>>>>> "The land of the free will cease to be when it's no longer the home
of
>>>>>> the brave."-- Rick Gaber
>>>>>>
>>>>>> "Any 20 year-old who isn't a liberal doesn't have a heart,
>>>>>> and any 40 year-old who isn't a conservative doesn't have a brain."
--
>>>>>> Winston Churchill
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Guidance,
>>>>>> Rich
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>
>>
>>
|
|
|
|
| Re: OT: Springtime in Islamberg. [message #84941 is a reply to message #84931] |
Mon, 21 May 2007 15:10 |
dc[3]
Messages: 895
Registered: September 2005
|
Senior Member |
|
|
"TCB" <nobody@ishere.com> wrote:
>In WW II we were attacked, but despite what you learned in history class
>it was a very complex thing. The US had been 'negotiating' for peace with
>imperial Japan, and doing so in extremely bad faith.
This is debatable, but what is not debatable is there was
plenty of aggression and bad faith to go 'round.
Why did you not mention the Japanese' aggression and
bad-faith negotiations?
>Sentiment in the US
>was wildly anti-war, polls show over 80% of the public were against the
US
>entering the war,
They remembered "The War to End all War" all too well I think.
WWI was a vastly different beast though, and once people
saw the nature of the enemy in 1941, those poll numbers
inverted. Overnight.
>As far as Afghanistan, it's hard to say. On the one hand the Taliban clearly
>were providing al-Queda with a safe haven which is a massive operational
>gift to a non-state actor. That said, one could argue that Pakistan (operations,
>training) and Saudi Arabia (money, recruits) were as responsible.
But much less belligerent and uncooperative...
>One could
>go further and suggest that the US should have attacked the US, as it was
>our funding, training and support that _made_ both the Taliban and al-Queda
Nonsense. Both of these entities arose from Islamist ideology
and needed little from us to learn how to sneak box-cutters
onto planes and hijack them.
If anything, our support of _Muslim_ mujhadeen in Afghanistan
and prtecting _Muslims_ in Bosnia should have made them
allies. It did not, and the reason has little to do with our
occasional stupid acts in the name of anti-communism...
>Iraq? A pure, simple war of aggression, for which history will judge us
grimly.
Now, you compare these facts with the ones that got us into
WWI and see if you have not grossly overstated this...
Iraq had a nuclear reactor. Israel destroyed it
Iraq invaded its neighbor and had designs on the Saudis
Iraq financially supported terrorists and hosted them
Iraq developed poison gas and used it on the Kurds
Iraq wiped out entire families, used rape as torture,
tortured in most creative and unpleasant manners and
killed people for even looking at Saddam in a non-respectful
manner
Iraq got caught planning the assassination of a US President
Iraq defied 17 UN resolutions
Iraq defied the no-fly zone
I could go on and on...
Now, remind me of all the good reasons we got into WWI??
DC
|
|
|
|
| Re: OT: Springtime in Islamberg. [message #84945 is a reply to message #84941] |
Mon, 21 May 2007 16:01 |
TCB
Messages: 1261
Registered: July 2007
|
Senior Member |
|
|
"DC" <dc@spammersinhell.com> wrote:
>
>"TCB" <nobody@ishere.com> wrote:
>
>>In WW II we were attacked, but despite what you learned in history class
>>it was a very complex thing. The US had been 'negotiating' for peace with
>>imperial Japan, and doing so in extremely bad faith.
>
>
>This is debatable, but what is not debatable is there was
>plenty of aggression and bad faith to go 'round.
>
>Why did you not mention the Japanese' aggression and
>bad-faith negotiations?
They certainly did, but I wasn't commenting on Japanese perception of the
war, but on our own. Bill said we had 'been attacked,' which is absolutely
true, but there are qualifiers. I think there was more unity in the top levels
of the US government than the Japanese one. After all, one didn't need to
know too much about the world to know that getting the US involved on the
other side would be a long term net negative for the other sides.
>
>>Sentiment in the US
>>was wildly anti-war, polls show over 80% of the public were against the
>US
>>entering the war,
>
>They remembered "The War to End all War" all too well I think.
>WWI was a vastly different beast though, and once people
>saw the nature of the enemy in 1941, those poll numbers
>inverted. Overnight.
Had they known the true story of how they were in many ways manipulated into
war they might have changed their mind.
Also, I'm not saying the US shouldn't have gotten into that war, I'm only
saying that the true story is not really told about what happened.
>
>>As far as Afghanistan, it's hard to say. On the one hand the Taliban clearly
>>were providing al-Queda with a safe haven which is a massive operational
>>gift to a non-state actor. That said, one could argue that Pakistan (operations,
>>training) and Saudi Arabia (money, recruits) were as responsible.
>
>
>But much less belligerent and uncooperative...
>
>
>>One could
>>go further and suggest that the US should have attacked the US, as it was
>>our funding, training and support that _made_ both the Taliban and al-Queda
>
>Nonsense. Both of these entities arose from Islamist ideology
>and needed little from us to learn how to sneak box-cutters
>onto planes and hijack them.
That's very debatable. The Taliban grew in the Afghan refugee camps with
over a million displaced Afghans lived for up to ten years in some cases.
The original US support with the CIA had been a minor, small dollar affair,
mostly consisting of help in the refugee camps and WW I era Enfield rifles.
The old school CIA guys were smart enough to realize that the possibility
for blowback was very real, and that in the words of one, 'The Afghans are
so crooked when they die you don't have to bury them, you can just screw
them into the ground.' However, after a few years it became obvious that
Soviet morale was extremely low and there was the possibility that the Afghans
could actually win, instead of be a constant pest. At that point an explicit
decision was made to create a core of 150,000 'technoguerillas' that would
get vastly greater weaponry and more training via Pakistan. And they did,
demolitions, CCC, first aid, all of the stuff that any western, professional
soldier would learn. Bin Laden's group became, in many ways, the 'special
forces' of that core guerrilla army. So the US didn't teach them how to use
box cutters, but we did teach them how to make a bike bomb that could be
parked next to a bar where Soviet officers drank. The US taught them assassination
tactics, how to attack convoys, how to use Stinger missiles (the final magic
bullet that took the Soviet helicopters out of the war), and most importantly
the mindset of an insurgent. Combining that with thousands of years of guerrilla
fighting by the Afghans that left guerrilla tactics almost in their blood
and it didn't take much for them to improvise on the theme.
Two questions. There will millions of Afghans in Iran as well as Pakistan.
They received no military training (hell, the Iranians didn't even want to
feed them), and there is no evidence that they ever planned to do anything
against the us. Why? Second, if it's an islamist ideology to blame, why were
the Tajiks and Uzbeks (islamists to the man) who made up the Northern Alliance
still fighting against (mostly) Pashtun Afghans on 9/11, and why did the
readily accept our aid an arms when we attacked the country?
>If anything, our support of _Muslim_ mujhadeen in Afghanistan
>and prtecting _Muslims_ in Bosnia should have made them
>allies. It did not, and the reason has little to do with our
>occasional stupid acts in the name of anti-communism...
Had we made good on our promises to the Afghans there is a chance that might
have happened. Not much of one, but a chance. Instead we buggered off as
soon as they had finished dying for us (and themselves to be sure) and let
the country eventually fall into the hands of the Taliban. There might still
be a chance for the western forces to turn the tide in Afghanistan, although
it will take some massive intellectual leaps to do it. Iraq is much more
likely irretrievable.
>
>>Iraq? A pure, simple war of aggression, for which history will judge us
>grimly.
>
>Now, you compare these facts with the ones that got us into
>WWI and see if you have not grossly overstated this...
>
>Iraq had a nuclear reactor. Israel destroyed it
>Iraq invaded its neighbor and had designs on the Saudis
>Iraq financially supported terrorists and hosted them
>Iraq developed poison gas and used it on the Kurds
>Iraq wiped out entire families, used rape as torture,
>tortured in most creative and unpleasant manners and
>killed people for even looking at Saddam in a non-respectful
>manner
>Iraq got caught planning the assassination of a US President
>Iraq defied 17 UN resolutions
>Iraq defied the no-fly zone
None of which made Iraq in any way a threat to the US. Lots of countries
in the best graces of the US torture and kill their own citizens. And while
they invaded one neighbor and got slapped around by the US, when they invaded
Iran we gave them guns, money, helpful advice, and visits from Donald Rumsfeld.
Could Iraq have put together any sort of conventional military campaign against
the US? If Iran, Saudi Arabia, and Jordan did not consider Iraq in 2001 a
threat to their security, how could the US possibly feel that way? It's just
a war of aggression.
TCB
>I could go on and on...
>
>Now, remind me of all the good reasons we got into WWI??
>
>DC
>
|
|
|
|
| Re: OT: Springtime in Islamberg. [message #84950 is a reply to message #84945] |
Mon, 21 May 2007 16:37 |
DC
Messages: 722
Registered: July 2005
|
Senior Member |
|
|
"TCB" <nobody@ishere.com> wrote:
>Had they known the true story of how they were in many ways manipulated
into
>war they might have changed their mind.
I doubt it, and I think you have overstated the manipulation.
Since Vietnam, we seem to be finding "Tonkin Gulf Incidents"
all over the place...
>Combining that with thousands of years of guerrilla
>fighting by the Afghans that left guerrilla tactics almost in their blood
>and it didn't take much for them to improvise on the theme.
All true. Yet, they fell so quickly! Don't you think the fall
of the Taliban was a good thing?
Don't get me started on what we did in the name of anti-
communism. But that is *really* not the point here unless
you just intend to make some moral case (based on what?)
that we had it coming, despite our support of Muslims?
>Two questions. There will millions of Afghans in Iran as well as Pakistan.
>They received no military training (hell, the Iranians didn't even want
to
>feed them), and there is no evidence that they ever planned to do anything
>against the us. Why?
I'm not quite sure what you are asking here. Maybe you could
rephrase it?
>Second, if it's an islamist ideology to blame, why were
>the Tajiks and Uzbeks (islamists to the man) who made up the Northern Alliance
>still fighting against (mostly) Pashtun Afghans on 9/11, and why did the
>readily accept our aid an arms when we attacked the country?
What is your definition of Islamist?
If it is Islamic triumphalism through ther actions of Allah, then you
are right and there are other reasons for the things you mention.
If it is Islamic triumphalism through a new caliphate and the
subjugation of all the infidels into moslems or dhimmis, then
perhaps they were/are different sorts of Islamists.
>>>Iraq? A pure, simple war of aggression, for which history will judge us
>>grimly.
>>Now, you compare these facts with the ones that got us into
>>WWI and see if you have not grossly overstated this...
>>
>>Iraq had a nuclear reactor. Israel destroyed it
>>Iraq invaded its neighbor and had designs on the Saudis
>>Iraq financially supported terrorists and hosted them
>>Iraq developed poison gas and used it on the Kurds
>>Iraq wiped out entire families, used rape as torture,
>>tortured in most creative and unpleasant manners and
>>killed people for even looking at Saddam in a non-respectful
>>manner
>>Iraq got caught planning the assassination of a US President
>>Iraq defied 17 UN resolutions
>>Iraq defied the no-fly zone
>None of which made Iraq in any way a threat to the US.
WHEW! and the archduke's murder of course, was a big one!
>Lots of countries
>in the best graces of the US torture and kill their own citizens. And while
>they invaded one neighbor and got slapped around by the US, when they invaded
>Iran we gave them guns, money, helpful advice, and visits from Donald Rumsfeld.
So what? Would you have us attack all or none? Because
every evil was not addressed, should no evils be addressed?
What is you
r point here?
>Could Iraq have put together any sort of conventional military campaign
against
>the US?
Not the issue. Support for terror and real concern, the world
over, (including every Democrat who ran for President last time)
that this was the guy most likely to make real trouble in the
near future was the issue.
>If Iran, Saudi Arabia, and Jordan did not consider Iraq in 2001 a
>threat to their security, how could the US possibly feel that way?
Is there some lack of evidence for Saddam's plans? Does the
opinions of these "leaders" change that evidence? How?
>It's just
>a war of aggression.
Bull. It's a war for democracy. Will it succeed? Who the
hell knows?
But THIS is the issue that matters: Are those people in Iraq
capable of living in a democracy? Do they even want one?
This is the big gamble we have taken. I do not know the
answer but millions of Iraqi's do want democracy so perhaps
there is hope.
Your answer is both too simple and too cynical.
DC
|
|
|
|
| Re: OT: Springtime in Islamberg. [message #84976 is a reply to message #84913] |
Mon, 21 May 2007 20:37 |
Jamie K
Messages: 1115
Registered: July 2006
|
Senior Member |
|
|
The post you were responding to was about both countries.
If you only meant to discuss one of them Don, you really didn't make
that clear.
It's pretty obvious why Chas called you on that one, and it's not his
problem to fix. Nor does he deserve that level of condescension. Sheesh.
Cheers,
-Jamie
www.JamieKrutz.com
DC wrote:
> Pay attention.
>
> Bill L <bill@billlorentzen.com> wrote:
> There is one salient difference between WWI & II and our wars in
> Afghanistan and Iraq. We did not start the WWs. We did start the recent
> wars
>
> He is claiming that it was a small group within the countries that
> did it, and it was not an act of war.
>
> In the case of Afghanistan, that is clearly not the case. That is what I
> said. You brought up Iraq and tried to conflate the two.
>
> You got caught.
>
> Now, if you want to make a case about Iraq, go ahead.
>
> DC
>
>
> Chas. Duncan <duncan5199ATsbcglobalDOTnet@> wrote:
>> "Amazing" only if you don't bother to read the entire first sentence
>> of Bill's post to which your response began with this word "Rubbish."
>>
>> What's "amazing" to me is that you're so easily amazed.
>>
>> chas.
>>
>>
>>
>> On 22 May 2007 01:24:53 +1000, "DC" <dc@spammersinhell.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Wait a minute here. Where did I say a WORD about Iraq?
>>> Did you even read the previous posts?
>>>
>>> amazing...
>>>
>>> DC
>>>
>>>
>>> Chas. Duncan <duncan5199ATsbcglobalDOTnet@> wrote:
>>>> Afghanistan, yes: clear connection to originators of 9/11; Iraq, no:
>>>> zero evidence then and now of even the slightest complicity in the
>>>> attacks of Sept. 01. Take your "rubbish" out with the rest of your
>>>> trash.
>>>>
>>>> --chas.
>>>>
>>>> On 21 May 2007 23:57:37 +1000, "DC" <dc@spammersinhell.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Rubbish. That's like not blaming the Nazis for the beer hall putsch...
>>>>> It was just those few lunatics...
>>>>>
>>>>> There's no difference in any way that matters, between the leadership
> of
>>>>> the Mullahs in Afghanistan and the AQ's they harbored. And it was an
>>>>> act of war. Period.
>>>>>
>>>>> DC
>>>>>
>>>>> Bill L <bill@billlorentzen.com> wrote:
>>>>>> There is one salient difference between WWI & II and our wars in
>>>>>> Afghanistan and Iraq. We did not start the WWs. We did start the recent
>>>>>> wars. You can't call 9/11 acts of war from those nations. They are acts
>>>>>> of vindictiveness from a tiny group of completely evil lunatic fringe
>>>>>> players.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Bill L
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Rich Lamanna wrote:
>>>>>>>> To react to that, to conduct a "War Against Terrorism" is
>>>>>>>> about as desperate and pathetic IMHO.
>>>>>>> Bill, it's not a war against terrorism, this is a misnomer. It is
> a
>>> war
>>>>>>> against "Radical Islamic Extremism" and their desire to impose an
> Islamic
>>>>>>> theocratic caliphate on the free world.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> And it's so uncreative and historically repetitive as to be a big
> dumb
>>>>>>>> bore.
>>>>>>> We defeated Japan and Germany and they're not the worst allies. Come
>>> to
>>>>>>> think of it, we bailed out the French in WW2 and what the hell did
> we
>>>>> get in
>>>>>>> return, Chirac? Maybe now, however, with Nicolas Sarkozy we'll be
> better
>>>>>>> thought of.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Rich
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> 'Any 20 year-old who isn't a liberal doesn't have a heart,
>>>>>>> and any 40 year-old who isn't a conservative doesn't have a brain.'
>>> -
>>>>>>> Winston Churchill
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> "Bill L" <bill@billlorentzen.com> wrote in message news:464e6433@linux...
>>>>>>>> It was too early when I wrote that.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Look, it's a thorny issue. The point I was trying to make is I support
>>>>>>>> the freedom of those religions that grant others the same freedom.
>>> I
>>>>>>>> don't support freedom of a religion that is trying to curtail freedom,
>>>>>>>> you dig?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> We have to take responsibility for mis-guided people just the way
> one
>>>>>>>> does for a child. With a small child, you don't get angry and punish
>>>>> him
>>>>>>>> or her for making a bad choice. You exert calm, confident control
> and
>>>>>>>> direct it towards the right choice. We have to be bigger than them,
>>> and
>>>>>>>> not react angrily to their desperate attempts to cause an effect
> on
>>> us.
>>>>>>>> Think how pathetically desperate a group must be if the only way
> they
>>>>>>>> can dream up to communicate is through terrorism. That is quite
>>>>>>>> pathetic.>
>>>>>>> Just think how much more effective and creative it would have been
>>>>>>>> to spend a few billion dollars to simply buy access to the terrorists
>>>>>>>> and then put them away. Very little collateral damage. The people
> who
>>>>>>>> stand up for freedom by denouncing the terrorists get rich as they
>>>>>>>> deserve for their bravery and everybody else lives happier, free-er
>>> lives.
>>>>>>>> I know some will say it would never work like that, but did anyone
>>> ever
>>>>>>> try?
>>>>>>>> Bill
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Rich Lamanna wrote:
>>>>>>>>> Bill, I have no problem with freedom, you infidel :-) I am a
>>>>>>>>> constitutionalist and believe strongly in the 1st amendment.
>>>>>>> Unfortunately
>>>>>>>>> the radical Islamic doesn't cherish those same freedoms you and
> I
>>> hold
>>>>>>>>> dearly. They are willing to die to impose their fascism and intolerant
>>>>>>>>> theocratic rubbish upon us.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Remember Waco. The ATF, under the administration of Clinton and
> Janet
>>>>>>>>> Sterno, stormed the Branch Davidian home, in Rambo fashion, to serve
>>>>> a
>>>>>>>>> search warrant issued on the suspicion that the group was stockpiling
>>>>>>>>> automatic weapons, massacring almost 100 hundred men, women, and
>>>>>>> children.
>>>>>>>>> But I doubt that the FBI or ATF would ever raid these holy men,
> oh
>>> God
>>>>>>> no,
>>>>>>>>> despite the fact that they are irrefutably armed to the teeth and
>>>>>>> practicing
>>>>>>>>> for violent Jihad.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Did you read the article dude? Did you read the part about the violent
>>>>>>>>> incidents involving Jamaat Ul Fuora in the US?
>>>>>>>>> "By 2004 federal investigators uncovered evidence that linked both
>>> the
>>>>>>> DC
>>>>>>>>> "sniper killer" John Allen Muhammed and "Shoe Bomber" Richard Reid
>>> to
>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>> group and reports surfaced that Wall Street Journal reporter Daniel
>>>>>>> Pearl
>>>>>>>>> was captured and beheaded in the process of attempting to obtain
> an
>>>>>>>>> interview with Sheikh Gilani in Pakistan."
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> http://www.canadafreepress.com/images/paul-williams-map-larg e.jpg
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> What were Koresh and the Davidians guilty of? Maybe of being Christians.
>>>>>>>>> Nothing compared to this group. Wake up man, this is not about freedom
>>>>>>> of
>>>>>>>>> religion this is about a Jihad threatening our existence and the
> choice
>>>>>>> to
>>>>>>>>> exercise any freedoms let alone freedom of religion. We had better
>>> keep
>>>>>>> an
>>>>>>>>> eye on these guys.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Rich
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> From my cold dead hands - Charlton Heston
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> "Bill L" <bill@billlorentzen.com> wrote in message
>>>>>>> news:464d8d4f@linux...
>>>>>>>>>> I strongly support freedom, especially freedom of religion. Part
>>> of
>>>>>>>>>> religious freedom is the freedom of religious choice.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> A religion worthy of freedom would increase individual freedom.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> With freedom comes increased responsibility; with increased
>>>>>>>>>> responsibility comes increased freedom. By increasing freedoms
> for
>>>>> all
>>>>>>>>>> one's own freedoms are increased.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> “Constant and continual alertness is the price of freedom.
>>>>>>>>>> Constant willingness to fight back is the price of freedom.
>>>>>>>>>> There is no other price actually.”
>>>>>>>>>> — L. RON HUBBARD
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Rich Lamanna wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> You can thank me for lighting the fire, you can all fan the flames.
>>>>>>> Why
>>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>>>> heck not welcome some more illegals.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> http://www.canadafreepress.com/2007/paul-williams051107.htm
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> "Eternal vigilance is the price of liberty." -- Wendell Phillips
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> "No man is entitled to the blessings of freedom unless he be vigilant
>>>>>>> in
>>>>>>>>> its
>>>>>>>>>>> preservation." -- General Douglas MacArthur
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> "FREEDOM IS NOT FOR THE TIMID." -- posted as an announcement outside
>>>>> a
>>>>>>>>>>> Unitarian Church in Texas on Sept. 17, 2001
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> "In the beginning of a change the patriot is a scarce man, and
> brave,
>>>>>>>>> and
>>>>>>>>>>> hated
>>>>>>>>>>> and scorned. When his cause succeeds, the timid join him, for
> then
>>>>> it
>>>>>>>>> costs
>>>>>>>>>>> nothing
>>>>>>>>>>> to be a patriot." -- Mark Twain
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> "History does not long entrust the care of freedom to the weak
>>> or
>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>>>> timid."
>>>>>>>>>>> -- Dwight D. Eisenhower, First Inaugural Address, Jan. 20, 1953
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> "The future doesn't belong to the faint-hearted. It belongs to
>>> the
>>>>>>>>> brave."
>>>>>>>>>>> -- Ronald Reagan
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> "The battle, sir, is not to the strong alone; it is to the vigilant,
>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>>>> active,
>>>>>>>>>>> the brave." -- Patrick Henry
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> "The land of the free will cease to be when it's no longer the
> home
>>>>> of
>>>>>>>>>>> the brave."-- Rick Gaber
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> "Any 20 year-old who isn't a liberal doesn't have a heart,
>>>>>>>>>>> and any 40 year-old who isn't a conservative doesn't have a brain."
>
|
|
|
|
| Re: OT: Springtime in Islamberg. [message #84977 is a reply to message #84862] |
Mon, 21 May 2007 20:40 |
Jamie K
Messages: 1115
Registered: July 2006
|
Senior Member |
|
|
> 'Any 20 year-old who isn't a liberal doesn't have a heart,
> and any 40 year-old who isn't a conservative doesn't have a brain.' -
> Winston Churchill
Fact check:
http://www.winstonchurchill.org/i4a/pages/index.cfm?pageid=1 12
Quotes Falsely Attributed:
These quotes make for good story-telling but popular myth has falsely
attributed them to Churchill.
Cheers,
-Jamie
www.JamieKrutz.com
Rich Lamanna wrote:
>> To react to that, to conduct a "War Against Terrorism" is
>> about as desperate and pathetic IMHO.
>
> Bill, it's not a war against terrorism, this is a misnomer. It is a war
> against "Radical Islamic Extremism" and their desire to impose an Islamic
> theocratic caliphate on the free world.
>
>> And it's so uncreative and historically repetitive as to be a big dumb
>> bore.
>
> We defeated Japan and Germany and they're not the worst allies. Come to
> think of it, we bailed out the French in WW2 and what the hell did we get in
> return, Chirac? Maybe now, however, with Nicolas Sarkozy we'll be better
> thought of.
>
> Rich
>
>
> "Bill L" <bill@billlorentzen.com> wrote in message news:464e6433@linux...
>> It was too early when I wrote that.
>>
>> Look, it's a thorny issue. The point I was trying to make is I support
>> the freedom of those religions that grant others the same freedom. I
>> don't support freedom of a religion that is trying to curtail freedom,
>> you dig?
>>
>> We have to take responsibility for mis-guided people just the way one
>> does for a child. With a small child, you don't get angry and punish him
>> or her for making a bad choice. You exert calm, confident control and
>> direct it towards the right choice. We have to be bigger than them, and
>> not react angrily to their desperate attempts to cause an effect on us.
>> Think how pathetically desperate a group must be if the only way they
>> can dream up to communicate is through terrorism. That is quite
>> pathetic.>
> Just think how much more effective and creative it would have been
>> to spend a few billion dollars to simply buy access to the terrorists
>> and then put them away. Very little collateral damage. The people who
>> stand up for freedom by denouncing the terrorists get rich as they
>> deserve for their bravery and everybody else lives happier, free-er lives.
>>
>> I know some will say it would never work like that, but did anyone ever
> try?
>> Bill
>>
>>
>> Rich Lamanna wrote:
>>> Bill, I have no problem with freedom, you infidel :-) I am a
>>> constitutionalist and believe strongly in the 1st amendment.
> Unfortunately
>>> the radical Islamic doesn't cherish those same freedoms you and I hold
>>> dearly. They are willing to die to impose their fascism and intolerant
>>> theocratic rubbish upon us.
>>>
>>> Remember Waco. The ATF, under the administration of Clinton and Janet
>>> Sterno, stormed the Branch Davidian home, in Rambo fashion, to serve a
>>> search warrant issued on the suspicion that the group was stockpiling
>>> automatic weapons, massacring almost 100 hundred men, women, and
> children.
>>> But I doubt that the FBI or ATF would ever raid these holy men, oh God
> no,
>>> despite the fact that they are irrefutably armed to the teeth and
> practicing
>>> for violent Jihad.
>>>
>>> Did you read the article dude? Did you read the part about the violent
>>> incidents involving Jamaat Ul Fuora in the US?
>>> "By 2004 federal investigators uncovered evidence that linked both the
> DC
>>> "sniper killer" John Allen Muhammed and "Shoe Bomber" Richard Reid to
> the
>>> group and reports surfaced that Wall Street Journal reporter Daniel
> Pearl
>>> was captured and beheaded in the process of attempting to obtain an
>>> interview with Sheikh Gilani in Pakistan."
>>>
>>> http://www.canadafreepress.com/images/paul-williams-map-larg e.jpg
>>>
>>> What were Koresh and the Davidians guilty of? Maybe of being Christians.
>>> Nothing compared to this group. Wake up man, this is not about freedom
> of
>>> religion this is about a Jihad threatening our existence and the choice
> to
>>> exercise any freedoms let alone freedom of religion. We had better keep
> an
>>> eye on these guys.
>>>
>>> Rich
>>>
>>> From my cold dead hands - Charlton Heston
>>>
>>>
>>> "Bill L" <bill@billlorentzen.com> wrote in message
> news:464d8d4f@linux...
>>>> I strongly support freedom, especially freedom of religion. Part of
>>>> religious freedom is the freedom of religious choice.
>>>>
>>>> A religion worthy of freedom would increase individual freedom.
>>>>
>>>> With freedom comes increased responsibility; with increased
>>>> responsibility comes increased freedom. By increasing freedoms for all
>>>> one's own freedoms are increased.
>>>>
>>>> “Constant and continual alertness is the price of freedom.
>>>> Constant willingness to fight back is the price of freedom.
>>>> There is no other price actually.”
>>>> — L. RON HUBBARD
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Rich Lamanna wrote:
>>>>> You can thank me for lighting the fire, you can all fan the flames.
> Why
>>> the
>>>>> heck not welcome some more illegals.
>>>>>
>>>>> http://www.canadafreepress.com/2007/paul-williams051107.htm
>>>>>
>>>>> "Eternal vigilance is the price of liberty." -- Wendell Phillips
>>>>>
>>>>> "No man is entitled to the blessings of freedom unless he be vigilant
> in
>>> its
>>>>> preservation." -- General Douglas MacArthur
>>>>>
>>>>> "FREEDOM IS NOT FOR THE TIMID." -- posted as an announcement outside a
>>>>> Unitarian Church in Texas on Sept. 17, 2001
>>>>>
>>>>> "In the beginning of a change the patriot is a scarce man, and brave,
>>> and
>>>>> hated
>>>>> and scorned. When his cause succeeds, the timid join him, for then it
>>> costs
>>>>> nothing
>>>>> to be a patriot." -- Mark Twain
>>>>>
>>>>> "History does not long entrust the care of freedom to the weak or the
>>>>> timid."
>>>>> -- Dwight D. Eisenhower, First Inaugural Address, Jan. 20, 1953
>>>>>
>>>>> "The future doesn't belong to the faint-hearted. It belongs to the
>>> brave."
>>>>> -- Ronald Reagan
>>>>>
>>>>> "The battle, sir, is not to the strong alone; it is to the vigilant,
> the
>>>>> active,
>>>>> the brave." -- Patrick Henry
>>>>>
>>>>> "The land of the free will cease to be when it's no longer the home of
>>>>> the brave."-- Rick Gaber
>>>>>
>>>>> "Any 20 year-old who isn't a liberal doesn't have a heart,
>>>>> and any 40 year-old who isn't a conservative doesn't have a brain." --
>>>>> Winston Churchill
>>>>>
>>>>> Guidance,
>>>>> Rich
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>
>
>
|
|
|
|
| Re: Springtime in Islamberg. [message #84979 is a reply to message #84811] |
Mon, 21 May 2007 21:16 |
Deej [4]
Messages: 1292
Registered: January 2007
|
Senior Member |
|
|
"Jamie K" <Meta@Dimensional.com> wrote in message news:464f363b@linux...
>
> Yep Don, dangerous naivety is an epidemic these days. It leads to
> blindered thinking on all sides, which can lead to naive, sometimes
> idiotically cocksure choices by whoever happens to be in charge. Leading
> to actions that may in fact be counterproductive to the actual goals most
> everyone SAYS they believe in.
>
> But then, when a situation predictably deteriorates, the easy
> rationalization is that IT COULD HAVE BEEN WORSE. Well sure, but it could
> also have been much, much better.
>
> And this shaky rationalization, this flawed logic, this possible delusion
> is sometimes used to justify continued marching, blindly, in a wrong
> direction.
>
> "Hey, let's feel good about the continued screwups because IT COULD HAVE
> BEEN WORSE."
>
> Followed by the completely irrational "In fact, we'd better KEEP SCREWING
> IT UP UNTIL AT LAST WE SUCCEED!"
>
> Go team! Over the cliff.
>
> "Uh, OK, sure we're now falling toward the jagged rocks below, but IT
> COULD HAVE BEEN WORSE!" :^)
>
> There's probably a diagnosis for this type of rationalized psychotic
> malfeasance.
>
> Cheers,
> -Jamie
> www.JamieKrutz.com
>
>
But he did say this:
"I would say to the House, as I said to those who have joined this
Government, I have nothing to offer but blood, toil, tears and sweat. We
have before us an ordeal of the most grievous kind. We have before us many
long months of toil and struggle.
"You ask what is our policy. I will say, it is to wage war with all
our might, with all the strength that God can give us, to wage war against a
monstrous tyranny never surpassed in the dark, lamentable catalogue of human
crime.
"You ask what is our aim? I can answer in one word: Victory. Victory
at all costs. Victory in spite of all terror. Victory however long and hard
the road may be. For without victory there is no survival."
—First speech as Prime Minister, House of Commons, 13 May 1940.
Sounds familiar to me.
|
|
|
|
| Re: Springtime in Islamberg. [message #84988 is a reply to message #84979] |
Mon, 21 May 2007 22:38 |
Jamie K
Messages: 1115
Registered: July 2006
|
Senior Member |
|
|
I think you answered the wrong post, Deej, sounds like you're reacting
to the point that Churchill didn't actually say that stuff about being
liberal and conservative by certain ages that we keep seeing quoted
smugly as a (false, as it happens) justification for a particular filter
set.
But is it the new talking point to compare Bush to Churchill? Last I
heard, Bush was comparing himself to Lincoln.
Politicians (or their PR proxies) will sometimes attempt to invoke
images and comparisons in an attempt to flatter themselves and their
policies, whether generally appropriate or not.
Comparing our current president to Churchill is a stretch. But it would
be an interesting discussion.
Cheers,
-Jamie
www.JamieKrutz.com
DJ wrote:
> "Jamie K" <Meta@Dimensional.com> wrote in message news:464f363b@linux...
>> Yep Don, dangerous naivety is an epidemic these days. It leads to
>> blindered thinking on all sides, which can lead to naive, sometimes
>> idiotically cocksure choices by whoever happens to be in charge. Leading
>> to actions that may in fact be counterproductive to the actual goals most
>> everyone SAYS they believe in.
>>
>> But then, when a situation predictably deteriorates, the easy
>> rationalization is that IT COULD HAVE BEEN WORSE. Well sure, but it could
>> also have been much, much better.
>>
>> And this shaky rationalization, this flawed logic, this possible delusion
>> is sometimes used to justify continued marching, blindly, in a wrong
>> direction.
>>
>> "Hey, let's feel good about the continued screwups because IT COULD HAVE
>> BEEN WORSE."
>>
>> Followed by the completely irrational "In fact, we'd better KEEP SCREWING
>> IT UP UNTIL AT LAST WE SUCCEED!"
>>
>> Go team! Over the cliff.
>>
>> "Uh, OK, sure we're now falling toward the jagged rocks below, but IT
>> COULD HAVE BEEN WORSE!" :^)
>>
>> There's probably a diagnosis for this type of rationalized psychotic
>> malfeasance.
>>
>> Cheers,
>> -Jamie
>> www.JamieKrutz.com
>>
>>
> But he did say this:
>
> "I would say to the House, as I said to those who have joined this
> Government, I have nothing to offer but blood, toil, tears and sweat. We
> have before us an ordeal of the most grievous kind. We have before us many
> long months of toil and struggle.
> "You ask what is our policy. I will say, it is to wage war with all
> our might, with all the strength that God can give us, to wage war against a
> monstrous tyranny never surpassed in the dark, lamentable catalogue of human
> crime.
>
> "You ask what is our aim? I can answer in one word: Victory. Victory
> at all costs. Victory in spite of all terror. Victory however long and hard
> the road may be. For without victory there is no survival."
>
> —First speech as Prime Minister, House of Commons, 13 May 1940.
>
> Sounds familiar to me.
>
>
>
>
>
>
|
|
|
|
| Re: Springtime in Islamberg. [message #84993 is a reply to message #84988] |
Tue, 22 May 2007 07:44 |
Deej [4]
Messages: 1292
Registered: January 2007
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Jaimie,
I don't think Bush has ever compared himself to Churchill. I'm doing this by
just pointing out that he said pretty much the same thing before we fwent in
to finish the ongoing war Clinton neglected in Iraq.
:"The inherent vice of capitalism is the unequal sharing of the blessings.
The inherent blessing of socialism is the equal sharing of misery".-Winston
Churchill
;o)
"Jamie K" <Meta@Dimensional.com> wrote in message news:4652832d$1@linux...
>
> I think you answered the wrong post, Deej, sounds like you're reacting to
> the point that Churchill didn't actually say that stuff about being
> liberal and conservative by certain ages that we keep seeing quoted
> smugly as a (false, as it happens) justification for a particular filter
> set.
>
> But is it the new talking point to compare Bush to Churchill? Last I
> heard, Bush was comparing himself to Lincoln.
>
> Politicians (or their PR proxies) will sometimes attempt to invoke images
> and comparisons in an attempt to flatter themselves and their policies,
> whether generally appropriate or not.
>
> Comparing our current president to Churchill is a stretch. But it would be
> an interesting discussion.
>
> Cheers,
> -Jamie
> www.JamieKrutz.com
>
>
>
>
>
> DJ wrote:
>> "Jamie K" <Meta@Dimensional.com> wrote in message news:464f363b@linux...
>>> Yep Don, dangerous naivety is an epidemic these days. It leads to
>>> blindered thinking on all sides, which can lead to naive, sometimes
>>> idiotically cocksure choices by whoever happens to be in charge. Leading
>>> to actions that may in fact be counterproductive to the actual goals
>>> most everyone SAYS they believe in.
>>>
>>> But then, when a situation predictably deteriorates, the easy
>>> rationalization is that IT COULD HAVE BEEN WORSE. Well sure, but it
>>> could also have been much, much better.
>>>
>>> And this shaky rationalization, this flawed logic, this possible
>>> delusion is sometimes used to justify continued marching, blindly, in a
>>> wrong direction.
>>>
>>> "Hey, let's feel good about the continued screwups because IT COULD HAVE
>>> BEEN WORSE."
>>>
>>> Followed by the completely irrational "In fact, we'd better KEEP
>>> SCREWING IT UP UNTIL AT LAST WE SUCCEED!"
>>>
>>> Go team! Over the cliff.
>>>
>>> "Uh, OK, sure we're now falling toward the jagged rocks below, but IT
>>> COULD HAVE BEEN WORSE!" :^)
>>>
>>> There's probably a diagnosis for this type of rationalized psychotic
>>> malfeasance.
>>>
>>> Cheers,
>>> -Jamie
>>> www.JamieKrutz.com
>>>
>>>
>> But he did say this:
>>
>> "I would say to the House, as I said to those who have joined this
>> Government, I have nothing to offer but blood, toil, tears and sweat. We
>> have before us an ordeal of the most grievous kind. We have before us
>> many long months of toil and struggle.
>> "You ask what is our policy. I will say, it is to wage war with
>> all our might, with all the strength that God can give us, to wage war
>> against a monstrous tyranny never surpassed in the dark, lamentable
>> catalogue of human crime.
>>
>> "You ask what is our aim? I can answer in one word: Victory.
>> Victory at all costs. Victory in spite of all terror. Victory however
>> long and hard the road may be. For without victory there is no survival."
>>
>> —First speech as Prime Minister, House of Commons, 13 May 1940.
>>
>> Sounds familiar to me.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
|
|
|
|
| Re: Springtime in Islamberg. [message #84995 is a reply to message #84993] |
Tue, 22 May 2007 10:52 |
Jamie K
Messages: 1115
Registered: July 2006
|
Senior Member |
|
|
DJ wrote:
> Jaimie,
>
> I don't think Bush has ever compared himself to Churchill. I'm doing this by
> just pointing out that he said pretty much the same thing before we fwent in
> to finish the ongoing war Clinton neglected in Iraq.
Are you saying Bush essentially stole from Churchill's speeches?
The style of leadership and the situations/context are very different.
Extra points for Clinton bashing, though. If only Clinton had gone in
and racked up a 300 billion+ dollar war with no end, to try to "fix"
Bush I's unfinished business. Is it your theory that Bill was stupid to
agree with Bush I that that was a dumb idea?
> :"The inherent vice of capitalism is the unequal sharing of the blessings.
> The inherent blessing of socialism is the equal sharing of misery".-Winston
> Churchill
Neither sounds ideal the way he puts it in that soundbite.
BTW, is this now the thread of random Churchill quote digressions? :^)
"Crashbasket is the best damn dog name ever!"
-Winston Churchill, (interviewed from the grave)
Cheers,
-Jamie
www.JamieKrutz.com
> ;o)
>
>
>
> "Jamie K" <Meta@Dimensional.com> wrote in message news:4652832d$1@linux...
>> I think you answered the wrong post, Deej, sounds like you're reacting to
>> the point that Churchill didn't actually say that stuff about being
>> liberal and conservative by certain ages that we keep seeing quoted
>> smugly as a (false, as it happens) justification for a particular filter
>> set.
>>
>> But is it the new talking point to compare Bush to Churchill? Last I
>> heard, Bush was comparing himself to Lincoln.
>>
>> Politicians (or their PR proxies) will sometimes attempt to invoke images
>> and comparisons in an attempt to flatter themselves and their policies,
>> whether generally appropriate or not.
>>
>> Comparing our current president to Churchill is a stretch. But it would be
>> an interesting discussion.
>>
>> Cheers,
>> -Jamie
>> www.JamieKrutz.com
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> DJ wrote:
>>> "Jamie K" <Meta@Dimensional.com> wrote in message news:464f363b@linux...
>>>> Yep Don, dangerous naivety is an epidemic these days. It leads to
>>>> blindered thinking on all sides, which can lead to naive, sometimes
>>>> idiotically cocksure choices by whoever happens to be in charge. Leading
>>>> to actions that may in fact be counterproductive to the actual goals
>>>> most everyone SAYS they believe in.
>>>>
>>>> But then, when a situation predictably deteriorates, the easy
>>>> rationalization is that IT COULD HAVE BEEN WORSE. Well sure, but it
>>>> could also have been much, much better.
>>>>
>>>> And this shaky rationalization, this flawed logic, this possible
>>>> delusion is sometimes used to justify continued marching, blindly, in a
>>>> wrong direction.
>>>>
>>>> "Hey, let's feel good about the continued screwups because IT COULD HAVE
>>>> BEEN WORSE."
>>>>
>>>> Followed by the completely irrational "In fact, we'd better KEEP
>>>> SCREWING IT UP UNTIL AT LAST WE SUCCEED!"
>>>>
>>>> Go team! Over the cliff.
>>>>
>>>> "Uh, OK, sure we're now falling toward the jagged rocks below, but IT
>>>> COULD HAVE BEEN WORSE!" :^)
>>>>
>>>> There's probably a diagnosis for this type of rationalized psychotic
>>>> malfeasance.
>>>>
>>>> Cheers,
>>>> -Jamie
>>>> www.JamieKrutz.com
>>>>
>>>>
>>> But he did say this:
>>>
>>> "I would say to the House, as I said to those who have joined this
>>> Government, I have nothing to offer but blood, toil, tears and sweat. We
>>> have before us an ordeal of the most grievous kind. We have before us
>>> many long months of toil and struggle.
>>> "You ask what is our policy. I will say, it is to wage war with
>>> all our might, with all the strength that God can give us, to wage war
>>> against a monstrous tyranny never surpassed in the dark, lamentable
>>> catalogue of human crime.
>>>
>>> "You ask what is our aim? I can answer in one word: Victory.
>>> Victory at all costs. Victory in spite of all terror. Victory however
>>> long and hard the road may be. For without victory there is no survival."
>>>
>>> —First speech as Prime Minister, House of Commons, 13 May 1940.
>>>
>>> Sounds familiar to me.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>
|
|
|
|
| Re: Springtime in Islamberg. [message #84996 is a reply to message #84993] |
Tue, 22 May 2007 11:45 |
TCB
Messages: 1261
Registered: July 2007
|
Senior Member |
|
|
I dunno, Deej, I don't remember that. I remember being told that we had to
stop Iraq's nuclear weapon's program, get that uranium yellowcake out of
Saddamm's hands, shut down the mobile chem/bio weapons labs, destroy vast
stockpiles of nerve gas, and that we would be welcomed as liberators.
And about that 'ongoing' war. Again, in my recollection Saddam invaded Kuwait,
Bush the Elder (an imperial jackass of a president to be sure, but nevertheless
a statesman of no minor skill) put together a _real_ coalition to enforce
a UN resolution that Iraq leave the country. After they were chased out,
didn't that effectively end the war?
TCB
"DJ" <www.aarrrrggghhh!!!.com> wrote:
>Jaimie,
>
>I don't think Bush has ever compared himself to Churchill. I'm doing this
by
>just pointing out that he said pretty much the same thing before we fwent
in
>to finish the ongoing war Clinton neglected in Iraq.
>
>:"The inherent vice of capitalism is the unequal sharing of the blessings.
>The inherent blessing of socialism is the equal sharing of misery".-Winston
>Churchill
>
>;o)
>
>
>
>"Jamie K" <Meta@Dimensional.com> wrote in message news:4652832d$1@linux...
>>
>> I think you answered the wrong post, Deej, sounds like you're reacting
to
>> the point that Churchill didn't actually say that stuff about being
>> liberal and conservative by certain ages that we keep seeing quoted
>> smugly as a (false, as it happens) justification for a particular filter
>> set.
>>
>> But is it the new talking point to compare Bush to Churchill? Last I
>> heard, Bush was comparing himself to Lincoln.
>>
>> Politicians (or their PR proxies) will sometimes attempt to invoke images
>> and comparisons in an attempt to flatter themselves and their policies,
>> whether generally appropriate or not.
>>
>> Comparing our current president to Churchill is a stretch. But it would
be
>> an interesting discussion.
>>
>> Cheers,
>> -Jamie
>> www.JamieKrutz.com
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> DJ wrote:
>>> "Jamie K" <Meta@Dimensional.com> wrote in message news:464f363b@linux...
>>>> Yep Don, dangerous naivety is an epidemic these days. It leads to
>>>> blindered thinking on all sides, which can lead to naive, sometimes
>>>> idiotically cocksure choices by whoever happens to be in charge. Leading
>>>> to actions that may in fact be counterproductive to the actual goals
>>>> most everyone SAYS they believe in.
>>>>
>>>> But then, when a situation predictably deteriorates, the easy
>>>> rationalization is that IT COULD HAVE BEEN WORSE. Well sure, but it
>>>> could also have been much, much better.
>>>>
>>>> And this shaky rationalization, this flawed logic, this possible
>>>> delusion is sometimes used to justify continued marching, blindly, in
a
>>>> wrong direction.
>>>>
>>>> "Hey, let's feel good about the continued screwups because IT COULD
HAVE
>>>> BEEN WORSE."
>>>>
>>>> Followed by the completely irrational "In fact, we'd better KEEP
>>>> SCREWING IT UP UNTIL AT LAST WE SUCCEED!"
>>>>
>>>> Go team! Over the cliff.
>>>>
>>>> "Uh, OK, sure we're now falling toward the jagged rocks below, but IT
>>>> COULD HAVE BEEN WORSE!" :^)
>>>>
>>>> There's probably a diagnosis for this type of rationalized psychotic
>>>> malfeasance.
>>>>
>>>> Cheers,
>>>> -Jamie
>>>> www.JamieKrutz.com
>>>>
>>>>
>>> But he did say this:
>>>
>>> "I would say to the House, as I said to those who have joined this
>>> Government, I have nothing to offer but blood, toil, tears and sweat.
We
>>> have before us an ordeal of the most grievous kind. We have before us
>>> many long months of toil and struggle.
>>> "You ask what is our policy. I will say, it is to wage war with
>>> all our might, with all the strength that God can give us, to wage war
>>> against a monstrous tyranny never surpassed in the dark, lamentable
>>> catalogue of human crime.
>>>
>>> "You ask what is our aim? I can answer in one word: Victory.
>>> Victory at all costs. Victory in spite of all terror. Victory however
>>> long and hard the road may be. For without victory there is no survival."
>>>
>>> —First speech as Prime Minister, House of Commons, 13 May 1940.
>>>
>>> Sounds familiar to me.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>
|
|
|
|
| Re: Springtime in Islamberg. [message #85003 is a reply to message #84995] |
Tue, 22 May 2007 15:33 |
Deej [4]
Messages: 1292
Registered: January 2007
|
Senior Member |
|
|
"Jamie K" <Meta@Dimensional.com> wrote in message news:46532f2d@linux...
> DJ wrote:
>> Jaimie,
>>
>> I don't think Bush has ever compared himself to Churchill. I'm doing this
>> by just pointing out that he said pretty much the same thing before we
>> fwent in to finish the ongoing war Clinton neglected in Iraq.
>
> Are you saying Bush essentially stole from Churchill's speeches?
I didn't hear Bush use these words or anything close really. I think he is
confronted by a similar situation and tried to express the same things to a
nation, half of whom, doesn't believe that we are at war.
>
> The style of leadership and the situations/context are very different.
You noticed??? ;o)....well.....even Churchill had Gallipoli.
>
> Extra points for Clinton bashing, though. If only Clinton had gone in and
> racked up a 300 billion+ dollar war with no end, to try to "fix" Bush I's
> unfinished business. Is it your theory that Bill was stupid to agree with
> Bush I that that was a dumb idea?
>
I think clinton was elected president at one of the most pvotal times in the
history of the human race and utterly failed to realize what his
responsibilities really were. Hell man, even I recognized this, and he's
supposed to be the Rhodes scholar genius.
>
>> :"The inherent vice of capitalism is the unequal sharing of the
>> blessings. The inherent blessing of socialism is the equal sharing of
>> misery".-Winston Churchill
>
> Neither sounds ideal the way he puts it in that soundbite.
I think each creates the need for the other, actually. They are
yin/yang'esque
>
> BTW, is this now the thread of random Churchill quote digressions? :^)
I sorta' liked Sarah's sojurn into the mind of Samuel Clemens ;o)
>
> "Crashbasket is the best damn dog name ever!"
> -Winston Churchill, (interviewed from the grave)
Crash truly rocks. You're gonna have to meet "th'basket" sometime.
;o)
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: Springtime in Islamberg. [message #85006 is a reply to message #84993] |
Tue, 22 May 2007 16:07 |
Sarah
Messages: 608
Registered: February 2007
|
Senior Member |
|
|
"To occupy Iraq would instantly shatter our coalition, turning the whole
Arab world against us and make a broken tyrant into a latter-day hero ...
assigning young soldiers to a fruitless hunt for a securely entrenched
dictator and condemning them to fight in what would be an un-winnable urban
guerilla war. It could only plunge that part of the world into even greater
instability."
- George H.W. Bush
Baby Bush shoulda listened to Big Bush instead of to "the crazies" (how Bush
I's administration referred to the "neocons").
If this crusade is truly a righteous one, and if six figure "collateral
damage" is an acceptable loss for what we've gained (?) so far, then why
screw around? Why not just kill everyone between India and the
Mediterranean (except for Israel, of course)? It's the only way to be sure.
We must have the technology. After that we should probably just eliminate
all Muslims around the world, since apparently the Quran compels true
believers to kill non-Muslims. Islamic extremists are a cancer on
civilisation, and you have to get the surrounding tissue when you remove a
cancer.
It's only logical.
S
"DJ" <www.aarrrrggghhh!!!.com> wrote in message news:4653036d$1@linux...
> Jaimie,
>
> I don't think Bush has ever compared himself to Churchill. I'm doing this
> by just pointing out that he said pretty much the same thing before we
> fwent in to finish the ongoing war Clinton neglected in Iraq.
>
> :"The inherent vice of capitalism is the unequal sharing of the blessings.
> The inherent blessing of socialism is the equal sharing of
> misery".-Winston Churchill
>
> ;o)
>
>
>
> "Jamie K" <Meta@Dimensional.com> wrote in message news:4652832d$1@linux...
>>
>> I think you answered the wrong post, Deej, sounds like you're reacting to
>> the point that Churchill didn't actually say that stuff about being
>> liberal and conservative by certain ages that we keep seeing quoted
>> smugly as a (false, as it happens) justification for a particular filter
>> set.
>>
>> But is it the new talking point to compare Bush to Churchill? Last I
>> heard, Bush was comparing himself to Lincoln.
>>
>> Politicians (or their PR proxies) will sometimes attempt to invoke images
>> and comparisons in an attempt to flatter themselves and their policies,
>> whether generally appropriate or not.
>>
>> Comparing our current president to Churchill is a stretch. But it would
>> be an interesting discussion.
>>
>> Cheers,
>> -Jamie
>> www.JamieKrutz.com
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> DJ wrote:
>>> "Jamie K" <Meta@Dimensional.com> wrote in message news:464f363b@linux...
>>>> Yep Don, dangerous naivety is an epidemic these days. It leads to
>>>> blindered thinking on all sides, which can lead to naive, sometimes
>>>> idiotically cocksure choices by whoever happens to be in charge.
>>>> Leading to actions that may in fact be counterproductive to the actual
>>>> goals most everyone SAYS they believe in.
>>>>
>>>> But then, when a situation predictably deteriorates, the easy
>>>> rationalization is that IT COULD HAVE BEEN WORSE. Well sure, but it
>>>> could also have been much, much better.
>>>>
>>>> And this shaky rationalization, this flawed logic, this possible
>>>> delusion is sometimes used to justify continued marching, blindly, in a
>>>> wrong direction.
>>>>
>>>> "Hey, let's feel good about the continued screwups because IT COULD
>>>> HAVE BEEN WORSE."
>>>>
>>>> Followed by the completely irrational "In fact, we'd better KEEP
>>>> SCREWING IT UP UNTIL AT LAST WE SUCCEED!"
>>>>
>>>> Go team! Over the cliff.
>>>>
>>>> "Uh, OK, sure we're now falling toward the jagged rocks below, but IT
>>>> COULD HAVE BEEN WORSE!" :^)
>>>>
>>>> There's probably a diagnosis for this type of rationalized psychotic
>>>> malfeasance.
>>>>
>>>> Cheers,
>>>> -Jamie
>>>> www.JamieKrutz.com
>>>>
>>>>
>>> But he did say this:
>>>
>>> "I would say to the House, as I said to those who have joined this
>>> Government, I have nothing to offer but blood, toil, tears and sweat. We
>>> have before us an ordeal of the most grievous kind. We have before us
>>> many long months of toil and struggle.
>>> "You ask what is our policy. I will say, it is to wage war with
>>> all our might, with all the strength that God can give us, to wage war
>>> against a monstrous tyranny never surpassed in the dark, lamentable
>>> catalogue of human crime.
>>>
>>> "You ask what is our aim? I can answer in one word: Victory.
>>> Victory at all costs. Victory in spite of all terror. Victory however
>>> long and hard the road may be. For without victory there is no
>>> survival."
>>>
>>> -First speech as Prime Minister, House of Commons, 13 May 1940.
>>>
>>> Sounds familiar to me.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: Springtime in Islamberg. [message #85011 is a reply to message #85008] |
Tue, 22 May 2007 18:09 |
dc[3]
Messages: 895
Registered: September 2005
|
Senior Member |
|
|
"Sarah" <sarahjane@sarahtonin.com> wrote:
>OK, yeah, you said it: ". . . we spent a lot of money and killed a lot of
>people to be no safer than we were." Putting it mildly. This whole Iraq
>fiasco has only put us in more danger. I can't think of a better example
of
>trying to put out a fire with gasoline.
But all this is, of course, unknowable! It depends on your
assumptions.
We don't KNOW what would have happened if Clinton was
around still and had bombed a couple of more asprin factories
in respone to 9-11.
We don't know what would have happened had he
gone running when the next soldiers bodies were dragged
through the streets of some hellhole
We do know that OBL used the number of times we were
attacked and the weakness of our response to claim that
we were unable to respond in any other way but weakness.
We know this because he said it.
Your assertion is, at best, an "alternative history" version
that we cannot know the truth of one way or another.
What do you make of this?
http://www.michaelyon-online.com/flf/article.php?ID=9
I can get you hundreds more...
How would you answer someone who said that we no longer
have the guts to actually win a war; that the people at home
and the press no longer have the stomach to fight for freedom?
That Iraq is indeed becoming "another Vietnam" with
wretches like Jane Fonda making sure we lose, and then
not feeling the least bit of guilt from the bloodbath that follows?
Ths question has always been; do they want democracy?
On this, the whole thing hinges. I think a lot of them do, but
we have to stop calling the war (which has actually been going
well recently) "lost" and undercutting this effort.
You probably won't agree, and I will not call you disloyal,
but I do think you are wrong on this.
DC
|
|
|
|
| Re: Springtime in Islamberg. [message #85018 is a reply to message #85006] |
Tue, 22 May 2007 19:14 |
Deej [4]
Messages: 1292
Registered: January 2007
|
Senior Member |
|
|
"Sarah" <sarahjane@sarahtonin.com> wrote in message news:46537917@linux...
> "To occupy Iraq would instantly shatter our coalition, turning the whole
> Arab world against us and make a broken tyrant into a latter-day hero ...
> assigning young soldiers to a fruitless hunt for a securely entrenched
> dictator and condemning them to fight in what would be an un-winnable
> urban guerilla war. It could only plunge that part of the world into even
> greater instability."
>
> - George H.W. Bush
And you are referring to what coalition????...................the one that
Clinton failed to hold together the minute he was elected???
>
> Baby Bush shoulda listened to Big Bush instead of to "the crazies" (how
> Bush I's administration referred to the "neocons").
Bush I had achieved a scenario wherein if Sadaam violated sanctions, there
were remedies. No one was willing to explore those remedies in any kind of
serious way. this is Clintons major crime, IMO. He had a duty to do this and
he didn't. As the 90's wore on, a billionaire maniac who paid blood money to
the familes of terrorists to ensure that the could more easlily walk into
Israeli shipping malls and restaurants and murder people while he flaunted
UN authority was buiding his time until sham sanctions were officially
lifted while in Afghanistan, the weaselly rich wannabee who felt dissed
because the Saudi's didn't want him to defend them from Sadaam and decided
it should be us, collects the scum of the earth and every other variety of
homicidal miscreant, gets some lunatic mullas to deify them in their own
minds and sends these Aassholes around the world to kill people.
Sorry Sarah....some things are not complicated at all.
>
> If this crusade is truly a righteous one, and if six figure "collateral
> damage" is an acceptable loss for what we've gained (?) so far, then why
> screw around? Why not just kill everyone between India and the
> Mediterranean (except for Israel, of course)? It's the only way to be
> sure. We must have the technology. After that we should probably just
> eliminate all Muslims around the world, since apparently the Quran compels
> true believers to kill non-Muslims. Islamic extremists are a cancer on
> civilisation, and you have to get the surrounding tissue when you remove a
> cancer.
>
> It's only logical.
Because if you listen to the majority of the international press, they would
have you believe that there are a lot more crazy people in this world like
the assholes we are fighting than reasonable people who would like to be rid
of them.
In spite of the apparent lunacy that I see on the left side of the aisle, I
think that they have a huge part to play in the downfall of these cretins.
http://www.marxists.org/archive/hekmat-mansoor/2001/misc/ris e-fall-islam.htm
....if the left doesn't screw the pooch beforehand and in so doing, take
those in this country that are still willing to fight for it with them.
;o)
|
|
|
|
| Re: OT: Springtime in Islamberg. [message #85019 is a reply to message #84950] |
Tue, 22 May 2007 19:21 |
Bill L
Messages: 766
Registered: August 2006
|
Senior Member |
|
|
In the end there are a few simple truths the wise leader uses for guidance:
1. Force begets force
2. Ideas not bullets win in the long run (though dissemination requires
patient work)
3. False data and corrupt ideas from the mouths of evil leaders can only
be defeated by truth. Truth is not introduced with force.
Ergo, war is the desperate act of a leader who has already lost his way
and his confidence and has no right to lead.
Bill
DC wrote:
> "TCB" <nobody@ishere.com> wrote:
>
>
>> Had they known the true story of how they were in many ways manipulated
> into
>> war they might have changed their mind.
>
> I doubt it, and I think you have overstated the manipulation.
>
> Since Vietnam, we seem to be finding "Tonkin Gulf Incidents"
> all over the place...
>
>
>> Combining that with thousands of years of guerrilla
>> fighting by the Afghans that left guerrilla tactics almost in their blood
>> and it didn't take much for them to improvise on the theme.
>
> All true. Yet, they fell so quickly! Don't you think the fall
> of the Taliban was a good thing?
>
> Don't get me started on what we did in the name of anti-
> communism. But that is *really* not the point here unless
> you just intend to make some moral case (based on what?)
> that we had it coming, despite our support of Muslims?
>
>
>> Two questions. There will millions of Afghans in Iran as well as Pakistan.
>> They received no military training (hell, the Iranians didn't even want
> to
>> feed them), and there is no evidence that they ever planned to do anything
>> against the us. Why?
>
> I'm not quite sure what you are asking here. Maybe you could
> rephrase it?
>
>> Second, if it's an islamist ideology to blame, why were
>> the Tajiks and Uzbeks (islamists to the man) who made up the Northern Alliance
>> still fighting against (mostly) Pashtun Afghans on 9/11, and why did the
>> readily accept our aid an arms when we attacked the country?
>
> What is your definition of Islamist?
>
> If it is Islamic triumphalism through ther actions of Allah, then you
> are right and there are other reasons for the things you mention.
> If it is Islamic triumphalism through a new caliphate and the
> subjugation of all the infidels into moslems or dhimmis, then
> perhaps they were/are different sorts of Islamists.
>
>
>>>> Iraq? A pure, simple war of aggression, for which history will judge us
>>> grimly.
>
>
>>> Now, you compare these facts with the ones that got us into
>>> WWI and see if you have not grossly overstated this...
>>>
>>> Iraq had a nuclear reactor. Israel destroyed it
>>> Iraq invaded its neighbor and had designs on the Saudis
>>> Iraq financially supported terrorists and hosted them
>>> Iraq developed poison gas and used it on the Kurds
>>> Iraq wiped out entire families, used rape as torture,
>>> tortured in most creative and unpleasant manners and
>>> killed people for even looking at Saddam in a non-respectful
>>> manner
>>> Iraq got caught planning the assassination of a US President
>>> Iraq defied 17 UN resolutions
>>> Iraq defied the no-fly zone
>
>
>> None of which made Iraq in any way a threat to the US.
>
> WHEW! and the archduke's murder of course, was a big one!
>
>
>> Lots of countries
>> in the best graces of the US torture and kill their own citizens. And while
>> they invaded one neighbor and got slapped around by the US, when they invaded
>> Iran we gave them guns, money, helpful advice, and visits from Donald Rumsfeld.
>
> So what? Would you have us attack all or none? Because
> every evil was not addressed, should no evils be addressed?
>
> What is you
> r point here?
>
>> Could Iraq have put together any sort of conventional military campaign
> against
>> the US?
>
> Not the issue. Support for terror and real concern, the world
> over, (including every Democrat who ran for President last time)
> that this was the guy most likely to make real trouble in the
> near future was the issue.
>
>
>> If Iran, Saudi Arabia, and Jordan did not consider Iraq in 2001 a
>> threat to their security, how could the US possibly feel that way?
>
> Is there some lack of evidence for Saddam's plans? Does the
> opinions of these "leaders" change that evidence? How?
>
>
>> It's just
>> a war of aggression.
>
> Bull. It's a war for democracy. Will it succeed? Who the
> hell knows?
>
> But THIS is the issue that matters: Are those people in Iraq
> capable of living in a democracy? Do they even want one?
>
> This is the big gamble we have taken. I do not know the
> answer but millions of Iraqi's do want democracy so perhaps
> there is hope.
>
> Your answer is both too simple and too cynical.
>
> DC
|
|
|
|
| Re: Springtime in Islamberg. [message #85022 is a reply to message #85018] |
Tue, 22 May 2007 20:25 |
Sarah
Messages: 608
Registered: February 2007
|
Senior Member |
|
|
So . . . hang on a minute here . . . you're saying you think we SHOULD kill
all Muslims, starting with the entire Middle East?
S
"DJ" <www.aarrrrggghhh!!!.com> wrote in message news:4653a4f0@linux...
>
> "Sarah" <sarahjane@sarahtonin.com> wrote in message news:46537917@linux...
>> "To occupy Iraq would instantly shatter our coalition, turning the whole
>> Arab world against us and make a broken tyrant into a latter-day hero ...
>> assigning young soldiers to a fruitless hunt for a securely entrenched
>> dictator and condemning them to fight in what would be an un-winnable
>> urban guerilla war. It could only plunge that part of the world into even
>> greater instability."
>>
>> - George H.W. Bush
>
> And you are referring to what coalition????...................the one that
> Clinton failed to hold together the minute he was elected???
>
>>
>> Baby Bush shoulda listened to Big Bush instead of to "the crazies" (how
>> Bush I's administration referred to the "neocons").
>
> Bush I had achieved a scenario wherein if Sadaam violated sanctions, there
> were remedies. No one was willing to explore those remedies in any kind of
> serious way. this is Clintons major crime, IMO. He had a duty to do this
> and he didn't. As the 90's wore on, a billionaire maniac who paid blood
> money to the familes of terrorists to ensure that the could more easlily
> walk into Israeli shipping malls and restaurants and murder people while
> he flaunted UN authority was buiding his time until sham sanctions were
> officially lifted while in Afghanistan, the weaselly rich wannabee who
> felt dissed because the Saudi's didn't want him to defend them from Sadaam
> and decided it should be us, collects the scum of the earth and every
> other variety of homicidal miscreant, gets some lunatic mullas to deify
> them in their own minds and sends these Aassholes around the world to kill
> people.
>
> Sorry Sarah....some things are not complicated at all.
>>
>> If this crusade is truly a righteous one, and if six figure "collateral
>> damage" is an acceptable loss for what we've gained (?) so far, then why
>> screw around? Why not just kill everyone between India and the
>> Mediterranean (except for Israel, of course)? It's the only way to be
>> sure. We must have the technology. After that we should probably just
>> eliminate all Muslims around the world, since apparently the Quran
>> compels true believers to kill non-Muslims. Islamic extremists are a
>> cancer on civilisation, and you have to get the surrounding tissue when
>> you remove a cancer.
>>
>> It's only logical.
>
> Because if you listen to the majority of the international press, they
> would have you believe that there are a lot more crazy people in this
> world like the assholes we are fighting than reasonable people who would
> like to be rid of them.
>
> In spite of the apparent lunacy that I see on the left side of the aisle,
> I think that they have a huge part to play in the downfall of these
> cretins.
>
> http://www.marxists.org/archive/hekmat-mansoor/2001/misc/ris e-fall-islam.htm
>
> ...if the left doesn't screw the pooch beforehand and in so doing, take
> those in this country that are still willing to fight for it with them.
>
> ;o)
>
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: Springtime in Islamberg. [message #85027 is a reply to message #85023] |
Tue, 22 May 2007 22:14 |
dc[3]
Messages: 895
Registered: September 2005
|
Senior Member |
|
|
"Sarah" <sarahjane@sarahtonin.com> wrote:
>I would say that's nonsense . . . the only thing we've lost the stomach
for
>is going to war under false pretenses and killing the wrong people. And
the
>only thing the press lost the stomach for was challenging administration
>policy for fear of appearing "unpatriotic" in the aftermath of 9/11.
Answer #32 (with subtext of number 17).
>Osama bin Laden is not stupid. He goads us into war hoping we'll get mired
>down until we collapse. He saw what happened to the Soviet Union in
>Afghanistan and probably figures he knows how to bring down a giant with
a
>slingshot. If bin Laden is capable of happiness, I'm sure George Bush has
>brought him some.
Answer #19 with answer 7 implied, but not meant as an insult...
>Unfortunately for our soldiers and the innocent citizens of Iraq, our
>leadership IS stupid. Stupid and dishonest. Those would be really radical
>statements if experienced military leaders and intelligence veterans weren't
>saying the same thing in more polite ways.
>
>It's really hard to admit that we've wasted billions of dollars and
>thousands of lives, but continuing to make the same mistake hoping for a
>different result is generally considered to be insane.
Answer number 22 with a repitition of 17 above, but of course, you are
not like that!!
>How 'bout we use those dollars and manpower to secure our borders and secure
>our ports and use the international intelligence network to find and kill
>terrorists? And how 'bout we stop listening to "leaders" with vested
>interests in oil and defense contracts? Hmmm?
Agreement limited to answer #9 only, with reservations expressed in
number 49...
>If that's lefty lunacy, sign me up.
>
>S
Oh-tay
You know, I am starting to see your face when I read your post.
I don't want to debate much tonight.
We need all kinds to make a good world. Your kind as well as mine.
best,
DC
|
|
|
|
| Re: Springtime in Islamberg. [message #85031 is a reply to message #85027] |
Wed, 23 May 2007 01:05 |
Sarah
Messages: 608
Registered: February 2007
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Uh oh . . . damn . . . ya caught me stealing answers from the Liberal
Talking Point Encyclopedia. Well, surely you don't expect someone who's
still liberal at my age to be able to think for herself . . . (knocking on
skull) . . . hear that echo? Nuthin' . . .
S
PS: Explain the two kinds of people for me sometime when you have a few
minutes . . .
"DC" <dc@spammersinhell.com> wrote in message news:4653cdb5$1@linux...
>
> "Sarah" <sarahjane@sarahtonin.com> wrote:
>
>>I would say that's nonsense . . . the only thing we've lost the stomach
> for
>>is going to war under false pretenses and killing the wrong people. And
> the
>>only thing the press lost the stomach for was challenging administration
>
>>policy for fear of appearing "unpatriotic" in the aftermath of 9/11.
>
> Answer #32 (with subtext of number 17).
>
>
>
>>Osama bin Laden is not stupid. He goads us into war hoping we'll get
>>mired
>
>>down until we collapse. He saw what happened to the Soviet Union in
>>Afghanistan and probably figures he knows how to bring down a giant with
> a
>>slingshot. If bin Laden is capable of happiness, I'm sure George Bush has
>
>>brought him some.
>
> Answer #19 with answer 7 implied, but not meant as an insult...
>
>
>
>>Unfortunately for our soldiers and the innocent citizens of Iraq, our
>>leadership IS stupid. Stupid and dishonest. Those would be really
>>radical
>
>>statements if experienced military leaders and intelligence veterans
>>weren't
>
>>saying the same thing in more polite ways.
>>
>>It's really hard to admit that we've wasted billions of dollars and
>>thousands of lives, but continuing to make the same mistake hoping for a
>
>>different result is generally considered to be insane.
>
> Answer number 22 with a repitition of 17 above, but of course, you are
> not like that!!
>
>
>>How 'bout we use those dollars and manpower to secure our borders and
>>secure
>
>>our ports and use the international intelligence network to find and kill
>
>>terrorists? And how 'bout we stop listening to "leaders" with vested
>>interests in oil and defense contracts? Hmmm?
>
> Agreement limited to answer #9 only, with reservations expressed in
> number 49...
>
>
>>If that's lefty lunacy, sign me up.
>>
>>S
>
> Oh-tay
>
> You know, I am starting to see your face when I read your post.
> I don't want to debate much tonight.
>
> We need all kinds to make a good world. Your kind as well as mine.
>
> best,
>
> DC
>
|
|
|
|
| Re: Springtime in Islamberg. [message #85032 is a reply to message #85031] |
Wed, 23 May 2007 01:55 |
rick
Messages: 1976
Registered: February 2006
|
Senior Member |
|
|
those who see fighting a gorilla war with conventional means as smart
and those who don't.
those who see giving up rights for "safety sakes" as necessary
and those who don't.
....something like that...damn, i meant to stay out of this...
On Wed, 23 May 2007 01:05:31 -0700, "Sarah" <sarahjane@sarahtonin.com>
wrote:
>Uh oh . . . damn . . . ya caught me stealing answers from the Liberal
>Talking Point Encyclopedia. Well, surely you don't expect someone who's
>still liberal at my age to be able to think for herself . . . (knocking on
>skull) . . . hear that echo? Nuthin' . . .
>
>S
>
>PS: Explain the two kinds of people for me sometime when you have a few
>minutes . . .
>
>"DC" <dc@spammersinhell.com> wrote in message news:4653cdb5$1@linux...
>>
>> "Sarah" <sarahjane@sarahtonin.com> wrote:
>>
>>>I would say that's nonsense . . . the only thing we've lost the stomach
>> for
>>>is going to war under false pretenses and killing the wrong people. And
>> the
>>>only thing the press lost the stomach for was challenging administration
>>
>>>policy for fear of appearing "unpatriotic" in the aftermath of 9/11.
>>
>> Answer #32 (with subtext of number 17).
>>
>>
>>
>>>Osama bin Laden is not stupid. He goads us into war hoping we'll get
>>>mired
>>
>>>down until we collapse. He saw what happened to the Soviet Union in
>>>Afghanistan and probably figures he knows how to bring down a giant with
>> a
>>>slingshot. If bin Laden is capable of happiness, I'm sure George Bush has
>>
>>>brought him some.
>>
>> Answer #19 with answer 7 implied, but not meant as an insult...
>>
>>
>>
>>>Unfortunately for our soldiers and the innocent citizens of Iraq, our
>>>leadership IS stupid. Stupid and dishonest. Those would be really
>>>radical
>>
>>>statements if experienced military leaders and intelligence veterans
>>>weren't
>>
>>>saying the same thing in more polite ways.
>>>
>>>It's really hard to admit that we've wasted billions of dollars and
>>>thousands of lives, but continuing to make the same mistake hoping for a
>>
>>>different result is generally considered to be insane.
>>
>> Answer number 22 with a repitition of 17 above, but of course, you are
>> not like that!!
>>
>>
>>>How 'bout we use those dollars and manpower to secure our borders and
>>>secure
>>
>>>our ports and use the international intelligence network to find and kill
>>
>>>terrorists? And how 'bout we stop listening to "leaders" with vested
>>>interests in oil and defense contracts? Hmmm?
>>
>> Agreement limited to answer #9 only, with reservations expressed in
>> number 49...
>>
>>
>>>If that's lefty lunacy, sign me up.
>>>
>>>S
>>
>> Oh-tay
>>
>> You know, I am starting to see your face when I read your post.
>> I don't want to debate much tonight.
>>
>> We need all kinds to make a good world. Your kind as well as mine.
>>
>> best,
>>
>> DC
>>
>
|
|
|
|
Goto Forum:
Current Time: Mon Nov 18 16:48:09 PST 2024
Total time taken to generate the page: 0.02396 seconds
|
The PARIS Forums
Search
Help
Members
Register
Login
Home
