View unanswered posts | View active topics It is currently April 19th, 2014, 1:41 am



Reply to topic  [ 31 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3  Next
 Good News......... 
Author Message
Pro Bowl Player
User avatar

Joined: April 19th, 2005, 2:10 pm
Posts: 2478
Location: Michigan
Post 
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2004/03/ ... 4163.shtml

Bush ~ John Kerry ~ Hugh Hephner all blood related


http://www.tarpley.net/bush2.htm

Prescott Bush ( George W.'s grand father) Nazi ties


You wouldnt believe how much the average person doesnt know , it all depends how far down the rabbit hole your willing to go

Cross reference the Bush name with the illumanati and free masonry via the skull and bones "secret society"

_________________
[b]New York Giants 26 - San Fransisco 3 - CandleStick Park - Who's got it better than us???[/b]


September 29th, 2005, 10:29 am
Profile WWW
Modmin Dude
User avatar

Joined: December 31st, 2004, 9:55 am
Posts: 11825
Post 
The Bush - bin Laden article is interesting, but what are you trying to say? Are you saying that Bush is responsible for 9/11? that he is responsible for the Islamic extremists hating us? Are you saying that Bush may be responsible for Salem death therefore Usama is going after him and his family?

Haven't had a chance to read the others yet, but will post remarks when I have. Thanks for the links.

_________________
Go Lions!!! headbang.gif

Joe Fauria, MVP!


September 29th, 2005, 10:35 am
Profile
Stats Boy
User avatar

Joined: September 26th, 2005, 9:08 am
Posts: 16
Post 
TheRealWags wrote:
The Bush - bin Laden article is interesting, but what are you trying to say? Are you saying that Bush is responsible for 9/11? that he is responsible for the Islamic extremists hating us? Are you saying that Bush may be responsible for Salem death therefore Usama is going after him and his family?

Haven't had a chance to read the others yet, but will post remarks when I have. Thanks for the links.


We already know Yorick feels this way...has posted it COUNTLESS times before. (i.e. That NO terrorists existed before Bush in Iraq, and that HE created them ALL ) mblah05.gif mblah05.gif mblah05.gif

_________________
How 'bout a fresca? Hmm?


September 29th, 2005, 10:47 am
Profile
Pro Bowl Player
User avatar

Joined: April 19th, 2005, 2:10 pm
Posts: 2478
Location: Michigan
Post 
TheRealWags wrote:
The Bush - bin Laden article is interesting, but what are you trying to say? Are you saying that Bush is responsible for 9/11? that he is responsible for the Islamic extremists hating us? Are you saying that Bush may be responsible for Salem death therefore Usama is going after him and his family?

Haven't had a chance to read the others yet, but will post remarks when I have. Thanks for the links.


Im not implying anything ~ ... just interesting stuff to read, make your own conclusions

_________________
[b]New York Giants 26 - San Fransisco 3 - CandleStick Park - Who's got it better than us???[/b]


September 29th, 2005, 10:50 am
Profile WWW
Modmin Dude
User avatar

Joined: December 31st, 2004, 9:55 am
Posts: 11825
Post 
I read the article on the rocket launch and looked at the pictures but the only dates that I saw were in September and from what I can tell Hurricane Katrina hit August 25 in Florida and August 29 in Louisiana, almost a month before said rocket launch. Unless you have other information on the lauch DURING the hurricane, I will just pass this information off as hoax or conspiricy theory.

_________________
Go Lions!!! headbang.gif

Joe Fauria, MVP!


September 29th, 2005, 11:01 am
Profile
Pro Bowl Player
User avatar

Joined: April 19th, 2005, 2:10 pm
Posts: 2478
Location: Michigan
Post 
TheRealWags wrote:
I read the article on the rocket launch and looked at the pictures but the only dates that I saw were in September and from what I can tell Hurricane Katrina hit August 25 in Florida and August 29 in Louisiana, almost a month before said rocket launch. Unless you have other information on the lauch DURING the hurricane, I will just pass this information off as hoax or conspiricy theory.


I meant Rita ~ there's no theory, Just odd timing

_________________
[b]New York Giants 26 - San Fransisco 3 - CandleStick Park - Who's got it better than us???[/b]


September 29th, 2005, 11:02 am
Profile WWW
Modmin Dude
User avatar

Joined: December 31st, 2004, 9:55 am
Posts: 11825
Post 
Ferris wrote:
TheRealWags wrote:
I read the article on the rocket launch and looked at the pictures but the only dates that I saw were in September and from what I can tell Hurricane Katrina hit August 25 in Florida and August 29 in Louisiana, almost a month before said rocket launch. Unless you have other information on the lauch DURING the hurricane, I will just pass this information off as hoax or conspiricy theory.


I meant Rita ~ there's no theory, Just odd timing


OK, gotcha :wink:

_________________
Go Lions!!! headbang.gif

Joe Fauria, MVP!


September 29th, 2005, 12:15 pm
Profile
ST Coordinator – Danny Crossman

Joined: March 22nd, 2005, 8:42 pm
Posts: 3811
Post 
Look at the recent CIA report. Al Qaeda in Iraq is growing steadily. Most of them, say over 50% are Saudis who joined up because of US atrocities in Iraq. In other words, Bush's policies created them in a very direct and proven way. Just a reminder to those who forgot: there was no al qaeda in Iraq during Saddams time. Bin Laden called him the apostate. The only exception was Answar el Islam which was in a tiny enclave Saddam could not crush because of the air zones.

As far as Bush reshaping the Middle East, wow, give me my 1 trillion back, because I would never dreamed that that and 2000 American lives was necessary to establish an Islamic state where woman have no rights and where Iraq is allied to Iran.

So this war on terrorism is just a big wag the dog and pony show for those that mistake the mainstream media for news.

_________________
Far and away from the sound and the fury. . .


September 29th, 2005, 5:09 pm
Profile
Pro Bowl Player
User avatar

Joined: April 19th, 2005, 2:10 pm
Posts: 2478
Location: Michigan
Post 
Yorick wrote:
So this war on terrorism is just a big wag the dog and pony show for those that mistake the mainstream media for news.


Yeah ~ Have to be careful what you say about the Mainstream Media, Big Brother is watching you :shock:

I love the History channel whose sole purpose is to cover up government conspiracy and brian wash the masses.

_________________
[b]New York Giants 26 - San Fransisco 3 - CandleStick Park - Who's got it better than us???[/b]


September 30th, 2005, 9:33 am
Profile WWW
Stats Boy
User avatar

Joined: September 26th, 2005, 9:08 am
Posts: 16
Post 
Yorick wrote:
Look at the recent CIA report. Al Qaeda in Iraq is growing steadily. Most of them, say over 50% are Saudis who joined up because of US atrocities in Iraq. In other words, Bush's policies created them in a very direct and proven way. Just a reminder to those who forgot: there was no al qaeda in Iraq during Saddams time. Bin Laden called him the apostate. The only exception was Answar el Islam which was in a tiny enclave Saddam could not crush because of the air zones.

As far as Bush reshaping the Middle East, wow, give me my 1 trillion back, because I would never dreamed that that and 2000 American lives was necessary to establish an Islamic state where woman have no rights and where Iraq is allied to Iran.

So this war on terrorism is just a big wag the dog and pony show for those that mistake the mainstream media for news.


Stil apologizing for them eh? Doesn't it get old for you?

_________________
How 'bout a fresca? Hmm?


September 30th, 2005, 9:56 am
Profile
Modmin Dude
User avatar

Joined: December 31st, 2004, 9:55 am
Posts: 11825
Post 
Ferris wrote:
I love the History channel whose sole purpose is to cover up government conspiracy and brian wash the masses.

Really?!!?? And where did you learn that little tid bit of information???

_________________
Go Lions!!! headbang.gif

Joe Fauria, MVP!


September 30th, 2005, 9:57 am
Profile
Head Cheerleader

Joined: May 22nd, 2005, 9:22 am
Posts: 31
Post 
Yorick wrote:
Look at the recent CIA report. Al Qaeda in Iraq is growing steadily. Most of them, say over 50% are Saudis who joined up because of US atrocities in Iraq. In other words, Bush's policies created them in a very direct and proven way.


Wow, Yorick, you've done it again. Proven that you'll drink liberal-tainted kool-aid with your nose plugged in a failed attempt to discredit Bush and/or republicans. This is the same old fallacy-ridden conspiracy nonsense that you used to post on the defunct DLMB.

Take off your left-wing blinders, please. Islamic extremism creates terrorists, not George Bush.

Look at how many Americans (you, for example) hate Bush, his policies, and the so-called "atrocities in Iraq." Are these people strapping bombs to their backs and blowing up innocents? No, they're not. They protest the war and dribble rubbish on football message boards, but they don't become terrorists.

Any idea why? I'll tell you. Because the US is not a stronghold of Islamic extremism the way Saudi Arabia and much of the Middle East are.

In other words, terrorists are taught at an early age to hate and kill. They are taught often and without remorse. They don't become killers and murderers overnight. It is cultivated for a lifetime.

I know you want to blame Bush for everything, but he hasn't created a single terrorist. He has certainly ticked off a lot of people, but rational women and men find peaceful ways to express their discontent.


October 1st, 2005, 10:57 am
Profile
ST Coordinator – Danny Crossman

Joined: March 22nd, 2005, 8:42 pm
Posts: 3811
Post 
Wow, how many logical fallacies can we string together in one short paragraph?

No doubt the CIA and the army's "liberal" blinders are what is leading them to question this "mission accomplished" and "death throes" rhetoric as opposed to the corpses and bombs and civil war that is like escalating over there. Dude, the army just announced there would be no troop reduction for two years in Iraq. Heard that before? Victory is always just around the corner and in the mean time, the original assessment: much less than 100 billion, 1/2 troops back in one year is becoming a hazy memory. Can you spell quag-mire?

This bash the critic crap is a tired neo-con diversion that is laugable in light of the fact that polls already show that no one is buying Bushie blue skies rosey scenarios anymore. To even hack at that straw man speaks to the poverty of your understanding of the world.

Since you are undoubtedly not a coward why don't you enter into the debate in a real and substantiative way: Was al Qaeda in Iraq before the US came? (true or false?) Did Saddam blow up the WTC or did bin Laden?

I would love to hear the "conservative" answer to the anchors of Bush's Iraq policy.

"Terrorists are taught at an early age to hate and kill. They are taught often and without remorse. They don't become killers and murderers overnight. It is cultivated for a lifetime."

In school I was taught that this refers to a sweeping generalization. Obviously you have no understanding of the Islamic world at all to say something so simplistic. In fact, it sounds like an echo of al Qaeda's propaganda about Americans. You seem to have much in common?

Thanks for making your assumptions about me the subject of your argument, but really this has nothing to do with me, bush basing, or political ideology whatsover does it?

This was my challenge to the few stalwarts of this war on terrorism dog and pony show. Is there or is there not a CIA report noting that al Qaeda in Iraq are predominantly Saudis who joined because of frustration with Bush's atrocities in Iraq?

So that is the question. Do you have the courage and ability to address is in a meaningful way or will you dodge the question with more personal attacks? :lol:

_________________
Far and away from the sound and the fury. . .


October 3rd, 2005, 1:31 pm
Profile
Head Cheerleader

Joined: May 22nd, 2005, 9:22 am
Posts: 31
Post 
Yorick wrote:
Wow, how many logical fallacies can we string together in one short paragraph?

At least you accused me of being logical instead of illogical. ;o)

Yorick wrote:
No doubt the CIA and the army's "liberal" blinders are what is leading them to question this "mission accomplished" and "death throes" rhetoric as opposed to the corpses and bombs and civil war that is like escalating over there. Dude, the army just announced there would be no troop reduction for two years in Iraq. Heard that before? Victory is always just around the corner and in the mean time, the original assessment: much less than 100 billion, 1/2 troops back in one year is becoming a hazy memory. Can you spell quag-mire?

I didn't mention "mission accomplished" or "death throes." I am not under the impression that the Iraq war is anywhere near completed. Not going to argue with you about cost or timeframe. We would probably agree or at least disagree less than you would like. ;o)

Yorick wrote:
This bash the critic crap is a tired neo-con diversion that is laugable in light of the fact that polls already show that no one is buying Bushie blue skies rosey scenarios anymore. To even hack at that straw man speaks to the poverty of your understanding of the world.

Hmm, I hate to admit this, but I'm really not sure what a "neo-con" is, so I don't think I fall into that category. If that is what you're suggesting, that is. I certainly don't buy the "Bushie blue skies rosey scenarios." Does anyone believe that particular spin coming from the White House?

Again, I didn't mention anything about "blue skies" in my previous post. This is not relevant to our debate.

Yorick wrote:
Since you are undoubtedly not a coward why don't you enter into the debate in a real and substantiative way: Was al Qaeda in Iraq before the US came? (true or false?) Did Saddam blow up the WTC or did bin Laden?

(1) I have no idea exactly every place where al Qaeda was operating before the war. I imagine they had cells all over the Middle East, perhaps even in Iraq. Other terrorist organizations were certainly wide-spread as well.

(2) I'm fairly certain bin Laden masterminded 911.

(3) Finally (and again), this diversion is not relevant to our debate. We were not discussing who started the Iraq War and why, nor were we considering 911. My previous post addressed your comments about George Bush creating terrorists.

Yorick wrote:
I would love to hear the "conservative" answer to the anchors of Bush's Iraq policy.

You'll have to ask a conservative anchor, I think. I'm fiscally conservative and socially moderate, but I'm no anchor of the Iraq policy. I don't like what's happening there any more than you do (probably), but maybe for different reasons. However, I do think the US is committed. Whether we agree with the reasons for attacking Iraq, leaving now, I think, would result in "nothing accomplished" instead of the premature "mission accomplished."

Once again, this really has nothing to do with the Bush creating terrrorists comment.

Yorick wrote:
In school I was taught that this refers to a sweeping generalization. Obviously you have no understanding of the Islamic world at all to say something so simplistic. In fact, it sounds like an echo of al Qaeda's propaganda about Americans. You seem to have much in common?

If accusing terrorists of being taught to be terrorists is a sweeping generalization, then hand me a broom. He11, give me two. I'll sweep my generalizations double-fisted.

Perhaps we're arguing over word choice. Terrorists and Islamic Extremists are NOT synonyms for Muslims. I do not believe that all, most, or even a significant percentage of Muslims are taught to hate and murder.

It takes a certain kind of person to become a terrorist, a certain kind of religious fanaticism and a certain brainwashed, spoon-fed ignorance. Rational people do not just wake up one morning and decide to dedicate themselves to the killing of innocents. Millions and millions of peaceful Muslims do not go for a stroll in the evening and long for a bomb strapped to their backs.

Therefore, I repeat, George W. did not create a single terrorist. Those people were programmed by years and years of extremist training. They are like those poor kids in our own country growing up with parents involved in Nazi groups. They spew hate because it was jammed down their throats since birth.

Yorick wrote:
Thanks for making your assumptions about me the subject of your argument, but really this has nothing to do with me, bush basing, or political ideology whatsover does it?

Actually, the debate between you and me was supposed to be about whether Bush creates terrorists. You seemed hellbent on adding new topics to the conversation (most of which I addressed above).

I do stand by my earlier comments regardless. From your post here and from those on the defunct DLMB, your record and political leanings are well documented. You seem eager to discredit republicans at every turn.

Yorick wrote:
This was my challenge to the few stalwarts of this war on terrorism dog and pony show. Is there or is there not a CIA report noting that al Qaeda in Iraq are predominantly Saudis who joined because of frustration with Bush's atrocities in Iraq?

Many of the terrorists currently in Iraq are Saudis, you're right. All this proves is that there was a large network of al Qaeda in Saudi Arabia and that recruitment was high in that country.

That being said, I think it's disgraceful that so many terrorists are spawned from our so-called ally, Saudi Arabia. I'm disgusted with that fact and with our political pandering to the Saudis.

Yorick wrote:
So that is the question. Do you have the courage and ability to address is in a meaningful way or will you dodge the question with more personal attacks? :lol:

I think so! I certainly tried.

It seems, on the other hand, that you want to deflect the argument (i.e.--Bush created terrorists) by accusing me of siding with Bush and the White House on every decision and policy.

I think you're angry, Yorick. I believe that you despise the war in Iraq, George Bush, and probably most republicans. But do not hold all republicans (like myself) accountable for every decision made by the current administration.

I know I surely would have done things differently. I think most republicans would have, at least the ones I know would have.


October 4th, 2005, 12:06 am
Profile
ST Coordinator – Danny Crossman

Joined: March 22nd, 2005, 8:42 pm
Posts: 3811
Post 
http://english.aljazeera.net/NR/exeres/ ... 765F38.htm

Mission to Mars, rebuild New Orleans, in Iraq we will be greeted as liberators-these are all symptoms of an administration that makes policy on the basis of self-serving myths rather than facts, and brutally attacks experts in its own government when they question the prevailing political logic.

There was no AQ in Iraq before our invasion as every one knew, because AQ is a militant branch of Wahibism. There are far more Christians in Iraq than Wahibis and Christians are only 1% of the population. The reason that AQ suicide bombers are always Saudi, Yemenites, and Moroccans and the like is because Wahabi has a historical influence in those countries, specifically Saudia Arabia.

Islamic extremism is still to vague a concept, although much better than the catch all terrorist. You need look no further than Iraq where there are mostly Shi'ite extremists, specifically followers of Al Sadr. Very few of them, however, subscribed to the doctrine of martyrdom as it applies to suicide bombings.

Islamic extremism in general may be a threat to the US, but it is not contiguous with Wahibism, which is a much smaller Sunni branch of it. To be sure, as religious conservatives they espouse a return to an imagined Islamic society quite at odds with the modernity espoused by the West. Quite reasonably they see consumer capitalism and Hollywood as corrosive of their social values, much as Evangelical Christians do here in the US.

The idea that you should martyr yourself by blowing yourself up is hard to explain. I do not think that religion is necessary the key motivation. Look at Atta, and the Palestinians, who are for the most part not very devoutly religious at all. Suicide bombing is an effective military strategy for a people that has no political or military recourse. To be sure, religion is used to motivate the troops and justify this action. But the decision to become a suicide bomber does not appear to me to be fundamentally a spiritual event. Rather it is political disillusionment that fuels the decision to resist and religion is slapped on to justify the decision. Many palestinian and AQ bombers reveal this profile. The London bomber's tape is a case in point. He spoke in very clear english and made a very clear argument. If you keep slaughtering my Muslim brothers beware that we can fight back. Not only are Bush and Blair's policies cited as the reason, a perfectly inconspicious Briton decided to become a suicide bomber, the religious motivation was only slapped on as an ideological framework preaching to the base.

There are certainly many mosques where violence is preached and where the US is criticized. There are a hundred times more cafes where perfectly secular or people living predominantly secular lives criticize and watch Bush in Iraq. The number of mosques where Bush and AMericans are identified as the great Satan was pretty paltry before Bush came on the scene. His antics played so poorly over there that it greatly inflared the hatred of the US. THis was the direct conclusion of the CIA report. The people who blew themselves up, did not grow up in Saudia Arabia hating the US. They grew up in a Wahibi community, poor, resentful of the Saudi royal family plundering their resources, armed with US weapons. There rejection of western culture was quite synomous with Evangelical Christians. A brutal and illegal invasion of Iraq dramatically changed the chemisty and fueled an early grievance of US support for Isreal. The bombers signed up for their mission post 2003, in other words as a direct result of Bush's policies. This continues to be true, and the increase in atrocities, napalming Fallujah for instance, only creates more and more terrorists. THe vietnam logic of killing them there is hogwash. As long as Bush remains in Iraq he will create far more new guys than he can kill. IN fact his search and destroy mission routinely kill 90% civilians, and their families are starting to join AQ In Iraq, as the CIa report noted.



The model that islamic

_________________
Far and away from the sound and the fury. . .


October 13th, 2005, 12:01 am
Profile
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Reply to topic   [ 31 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3  Next

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
cron
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group.
Designed by STSoftware.