REAL WORLD EVENT DISCUSSIONS

We have not forgotten

POSTED BY: FUTUREMRSFILLION
UPDATED: Sunday, September 17, 2006 13:00
SHORT URL:
VIEWED: 1439
PAGE 1 of 1

Tuesday, September 12, 2006 7:46 AM

FUTUREMRSFILLION


*FMF drops this in for your reading pleasure and thens backs out of the way*


The Nation
Mon Sep 11, 9:49 PM ET



The Nation -- Keith Olbermann is without a doubt the best news anchor on television today. Two weeks ago, echoing the spirit of the legendary Edward R. Murrow, Olbermann took Donald Rumsfeld to task for comparing critics of the Iraq war to Nazi appeasers. Tonight, broadcasting live from above a desolate and still demolished Ground Zero, Olbermann delivered a stirring eight minute commentary indicting the Bush Administration's shameful and tragic response to 9/11. The entire speech is worth watching and reading, so I'm posting the full text below.



Half a lifetime ago, I worked in this now-empty space. And for 40 days after the attacks, I worked here again, trying to make sense of what happened, and was yet to happen, as a reporter.

All the time, I knew that the very air I breathed contained the remains of thousands of people, including four of my friends, two in the planes and -- as I discovered from those "missing posters" seared still into my soul -- two more in the Towers.

And I knew too, that this was the pyre for hundreds of New York policemen and firemen, of whom my family can claim half a dozen or more, as our ancestors.

I belabor this to emphasize that, for me this was, and is, and always shall be, personal.

And anyone who claims that I and others like me are "soft,"or have "forgotten" the lessons of what happened here is at best a grasping, opportunistic, dilettante and at worst, an idiot whether he is a commentator, or a Vice President, or a President.

However, of all the things those of us who were here five years ago could have forecast -- of all the nightmares that unfolded before our eyes, and the others that unfolded only in our minds -- none of us could have predicted this.

Five years later this space is still empty.

Five years later there is no memorial to the dead.

Five years later there is no building rising to show with proud defiance that we would not have our America wrung from us, by cowards and criminals.

Five years later this country's wound is still open.

Five years later this country's mass grave is still unmarked.

Five years later this is still just a background for a photo-op.

It is beyond shameful.

At the dedication of the Gettysburg Memorial -- barely four months after the last soldier staggered from another Pennsylvania field -- Mr. Lincoln said, "we cannot dedicate, we cannot consecrate, we cannot hallow this ground. The brave men, living and dead, who struggled here, have consecrated it, far above our poor power to add or detract."

Lincoln used those words to immortalize their sacrifice.

Today our leaders could use those same words to rationalize their reprehensible inaction. "We cannot dedicate, we can not consecrate, we can not hallow this ground." So we won't.

Instead they bicker and buck pass. They thwart private efforts, and jostle to claim credit for initiatives that go nowhere. They spend the money on irrelevant wars, and elaborate self-congratulations, and buying off columnists to write how good a job they're doing instead of doing any job at all.

Five years later, Mr. Bush, we are still fighting the terrorists on these streets. And look carefully, sir, on these 16 empty acres. The terrorists are clearly, still winning.

And, in a crime against every victim here and every patriotic sentiment you mouthed but did not enact, you have done nothing about it.

And there is something worse still than this vast gaping hole in this city, and in the fabric of our nation. There is its symbolism of the promise unfulfilled, the urgent oath, reduced to lazy execution.

The only positive on 9/11 and the days and weeks that so slowly and painfully followed it was the unanimous humanity, here, and throughout the country. The government, the President in particular, was given every possible measure of support.

Those who did not belong to his party -- tabled that.

Those who doubted the mechanics of his election -- ignored that.

Those who wondered of his qualifications -- forgot that.

History teaches us that nearly unanimous support of a government cannot be taken away from that government by its critics. It can only be squandered by those who use it not to heal a nation's wounds, but to take political advantage.

Terrorists did not come and steal our newly-regained sense of being American first, and political, fiftieth. Nor did the Democrats. Nor did the media. Nor did the people.

The President -- and those around him -- did that.

They promised bi-partisanship, and then showed that to them, "bi-partisanship" meant that their party would rule and the rest would have to follow, or be branded, with ever-escalating hysteria, as morally or intellectually confused, as appeasers, as those who, in the Vice President's words yesterday, "validate the strategy of the terrorists."

They promised protection, and then showed that to them "protection" meant going to war against a despot whose hand they had once shaken, a despot who we now learn from our own Senate Intelligence Committee, hated al-Qaida as much as we did.

The polite phrase for how so many of us were duped into supporting a war, on the false premise that it had 'something to do' with 9/11 is "lying by implication."

The impolite phrase is "impeachable offense."

Not once in now five years has this President ever offered to assume responsibility for the failures that led to this empty space, and to this, the current, curdled, version of our beloved country.

Still, there is a last snapping flame from a final candle of respect and fairness: even his most virulent critics have never suggested he alone bears the full brunt of the blame for 9/11.

Half the time, in fact, this President has been so gently treated, that he has seemed not even to be the man most responsible for anything in his own administration.

Yet what is happening this very night?

A mini-series, created, influenced -- possibly financed by -- the most radical and cold of domestic political Machiavellis, continues to be televised into our homes.

The documented truths of the last fifteen years are replaced by bald-faced lies; the talking points of the current regime parroted; the whole sorry story blurred, by spin, to make the party out of office seem vacillating and impotent, and the party in office, seem like the only option.

How dare you, Mr. President, after taking cynical advantage of the unanimity and love, and transmuting it into fraudulent war and needless death, after monstrously transforming it into fear and suspicion and turning that fear into the campaign slogan of three elections? How dare you -- or those around you -- ever "spin" 9/11?

Just as the terrorists have succeeded -- are still succeeding -- as long as there is no memorial and no construction here at Ground Zero.

So, too, have they succeeded, and are still succeeding as long as this government uses 9/11 as a wedge to pit Americans against Americans.

This is an odd point to cite a television program, especially one from March of 1960. But as Disney's continuing sell-out of the truth (and this country) suggests, even television programs can be powerful things.

And long ago, a series called "The Twilight Zone" broadcast a riveting episode entitled "The Monsters Are Due On Maple Street."

In brief: a meteor sparks rumors of an invasion by extra-terrestrials disguised as humans. The electricity goes out. A neighbor pleads for calm. Suddenly his car -- and only his car -- starts. Someone suggests he must be the alien. Then another man's lights go on. As charges and suspicion and panic overtake the street, guns are inevitably produced. An "alien" is shot -- but he turns out to be just another neighbor, returning from going for help. The camera pulls back to a near-by hill, where two extra-terrestrials are seen manipulating a small device that can jam electricity. The veteran tells his novice that there's no need to actually attack, that you just turn off a few of the human machines and then, "they pick the most dangerous enemy they can find, and it's themselves."

And then, in perhaps his finest piece of writing, Rod Serling sums it up with words of remarkable prescience, given where we find ourselves tonight: "The tools of conquest do not necessarily come with bombs and explosions and fallout. There are weapons that are simply thoughts, attitudes, prejudices, to be found only in the minds of men.

"For the record, prejudices can kill and suspicion can destroy, and a thoughtless, frightened search for a scapegoat has a fallout all its own -- for the children, and the children yet unborn."

When those who dissent are told time and time again -- as we will be, if not tonight by the President, then tomorrow by his portable public chorus -- that he is preserving our freedom, but that if we use any of it, we are somehow un-American...When we are scolded, that if we merely question, we have "forgotten the lessons of 9/11"... look into this empty space behind me and the bi-partisanship upon which this administration also did not build, and tell me:

Who has left this hole in the ground?

We have not forgotten, Mr. President.

You have.

May this country forgive you.




----
Bestower of Titles, Designer of Tshirts, Maker of Mottos, Keeper of the Pyre

I am on The List. We are The Forsaken and we aim to burn!
"We don't fear the reaper"




NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, September 12, 2006 8:10 AM

HERO


Well written. Utterly meaningless. I feel cheated having read the article and demand you return my time.

H

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, September 12, 2006 8:18 AM

FUTUREMRSFILLION


Well you can demand. Its s free country. At least is sort of still is. But wait a little while, GW ain't out of office yet.


----
Bestower of Titles, Designer of Tshirts, Maker of Mottos, Keeper of the Pyre

I am on The List. We are The Forsaken and we aim to burn!
"We don't fear the reaper"



NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, September 12, 2006 8:22 AM

MAVOURNEEN


Quote:
Originally posted by FutureMrsFIllion:

The polite phrase for how so many of us were duped into supporting a war, on the false premise that it had 'something to do' with 9/11 is "lying by implication."

The impolite phrase is "impeachable offense."


Sorry, Hero. Your time is Done and Over. Go look elsewhere for Compensation.

I, for one, agree with Mr. Olbermann. I'm thrilled that Bush cannot serve a third term. Good riddance to bad (and woefully ignorant) rubbish.




"Have you ever been with a Warrior Woman?"

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, September 12, 2006 8:28 AM

FELLOWTRAVELER


Olbermann, as always, puts the biscuit in the basket... Although I hoped for some high sticking, maybe some boarding...

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, September 12, 2006 8:29 AM

PENGUIN


Thank you FMF...great commentary!


King of the Mythical Land that is Iowa

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, September 12, 2006 8:41 AM

FREMDFIRMA


About time some folk in the media grew a pair.

I just hope he doesn't wind up facing charges like Greg Palast and others who've dared speak truth to power.

I ain't forgotten neither, but I don't want a memorial, such things are nice and I've nothing against it.. but what *I* want ?

Heads, heads on pikes, and above all and foremost, I want the *right* heads, to be sure beyond all doubt that those who organized and ordered such a horrible thing won't ever be doing it again.

Barbaric, maybe - but barbaric or not, that's the tribute I would prefer to pay to the memory of the fallen.

"Those responsible will be held accountable." -V

-Frem

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, September 15, 2006 3:03 PM

CHRISISALL


Quote:
Originally posted by Mavourneen:
I'm thrilled that Bush cannot serve a third term.
*looks from 'twixed narrowed eyes*

I, Miss, count my chickens after they're out of office...

Ba-gawk Chrisisall

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, September 16, 2006 9:29 AM

AURAPTOR

America loves a winner!


Some Libs haven't forgotten about the 2000 election, is what Olbermann really means. Sadly, they should turn the page and try to remember what really happened on 9/11.

America was attacked. Every single one of us. Playing partisan politics only allows the enemy more room to roam, and distracts us from doing what is needed to defeat those animals.

This isn't a clash of civilizations. This is a clash FOR civilization.

(Olbermann is the most self absorbed, elitist and pin headed sports guy who isn't Bryant Gumble. There's a reason his show is on MSNBC, and not on any REAL network )

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, September 16, 2006 10:10 AM

DREAMTROVE


Auraptor,

Specifically, we were attacked on 9-11, here in NY. I know plenty of people who were there, and a few who lost family members.

Moreover, we were attacked by the Bush administration, at least as much as Al Qaeda, if Al Qaeda even had enough to do with it. If you study the situation enough, you'll come to this conclusion. Everyone will. Because it's the truth. It took five years for it to sink in to me, and I feel pretty slow about it.

It's not that Bush and his supporters are behaving badly by endlessly milking our tragedy for political gain, it's that they're the ones who are actually guilty. I'd be much happier seeing Bush's advisors, Cheney, Perle, etc. get got then Osama, because, honestly, I don't think Osama had a lot to do with this, if anything at all. And that's not because I'm a loon, it's because I looked into it.

Guys, 9-11truth.org and a ton of other websites our there, they supply evidence, and even when you skill out the 90% that's unsubstantiated rumor, the rest of that evidence is damned convincing.

They attacked us my ass. Auraptor, if I thought for one moment that you really cared about that, I would say, go read, learn, find out who your real enemy is, and I will guarantee you, they are a lot closer to home.

But I don't. I think you, and all the Bush crowd, are using 9-11 as a talking point, because support for big spender Baby Bush keeps that money rolling through the door, which is what this administration and its following is really about.

No offense, but I calls it as I sees it and I've looked long and hard. Just saying.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, September 16, 2006 11:21 AM

AURAPTOR

America loves a winner!


dream...truly sorry to hear of any losses to your, friends, family, etc...but to say Bush attacked us is flat out bullshit. Furthermore, by accusing your own President, you ignore the very danger which actually committed this crime. Islamic fascists. Stick your head in the sand all you want, but it doesn't change the facts.

Conspiracy nuts are as dangerous as the Islmaic terrorist, imo.

People love a happy ending. So every episode, I will explain once again that I don't like people. And then Mal will shoot someone. Someone we like. And their puppy. - Joss

" They don't like it when you shoot at 'em. I worked that out myself. "

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, September 16, 2006 1:18 PM

HKCAVALIER


Quote:
Originally posted by AURaptor:
Conspiracy nuts are as dangerous as the Islmaic terrorist, imo.
So you're sayin' we should send Dreamtrove down to GITMO for some frat hazing? And Pirate News's antics are on a par with beheadings?

AU, sometimes the rhetoric, she gets away with you.

HKCavalier

Hey, hey, hey, don't be mean. We don't have to be mean, because, remember, no matter where you go, there you are.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, September 16, 2006 1:46 PM

DREAMTROVE


Auraptor,

As I said, it took five years for me to come to this conclusion, and it took a lot of battering over the head with the facts.

Here's a dose of hard cold reality:

Al Qaeda is real, and is a threat. Sure, I have no problem with that. Saddam Hussein is a bastard, I have no problem with that. Osama bin Laden is the head of Al Qaeda. Al Qaeda is mixed up in stuff all the way from the France to China and everywhere in between.

Here's what's not a fact:

"We know who attacked us, and why"

Here's another one:

"There's no chance that it was anyone in our govt."

I had to sit down, litterally for years, and follow this story, every factual detail.

Did Bush plan it? No, he's a moron. I'll bet you a decent chunk of change that whoever did plan it said at some point to Bush "There's going to be an incident, and we need this to happen" and that President or the Vice President said "Okay" or "Do what you have to do" or something like that. I think it's entirely possible that he had no idea what the scale was. But I will bet the farm that someone knows, and that something like this transpired.

I haven't ignored the large international terrorist organization that declared war on the united states back in 1998 that Clinton said "hum de dum" about, and that, quite frankly, I suspect Bush is saying "Hum de dum" about.

I'm just not convinced that they attacked us, as a lone gunmen, on 9-11. In fact, there is no credible definite evidence that says they were even involved.

Quote:
Stick your head in the sand all you want, but it doesn't change the facts.


I'm really not one of those many people on this forum who disagree with everything you say. I was head-in-the-sand for five years before I got it. The conspiracy to attack the WTC could NOT have been carried out without inside help. Go through it from an investigative viewpoint, and there are a lot of people who've made the case a lot better than I can, it just doesn't add up. The official story is pure fantasy at best, and an elaborate cover-up at worst.

Quote:
Conspiracy nuts are as dangerous as the Islmaic terrorist, imo.


Sorry, this is a dumb rhetorical trick, and it's one that both parties have used: my opponents are as bad as the enemy. B^!!$#!+.

You know who's as bad as the enemy? The enemy. That's who.

Here's the question. And I want you to sit back and think about this long and hard. Do you know who the enemy is? Are you ABSOLUTELY 100% sure? Are you willing to stake your life on it?

Because that's the point we're at. What if you, and the 2/3 of the country that agree with you, are wrong? Think about that for a moment. Use your imagination.

I know it's a very serious situation, but I've come to suspect it's very real. I have gone and argued this with people in our own govt., who BTW, fall on both sides of this question. The thing which really began to worry me is that the "Bush et al did it" people can bombard you with tons of evidence to support their case. The "Al Qaeda did it" crowd can't give you jack. Certainly not enough to make a consistent logical story.

I could be wrong. Sure. But it's not as if I started out on this side of the fence and refused to budge. I spent years arguing against this. I bombarded the early conspiracists with emails telling them why I thought they were wrong, and why AL Qaeda was a real threat. Well it is a real threat. And John Karr is a sick sick man, but that doesn't mean he killed Jon Benet Ramsey. Al Qaeda is a terrorist organization, which doesn't mean that they committed, as a sole player, this act of terrorism, or that they even did it at all.

We know nothing. We can only guess. And I've increasingly sure that smart money is on this side of the table. If history's any judge, in 50 years it will come out as a great big scandal. But we need to know if it's true before then. In the absence of any conclusive proof, I feel very comfortable with playing it safe, which means not supporting someone I think might be a traitor and a terrorist.

I honestly don't think Al Qaeda could, technically, have pulled off this attack. America is not nearly as incompetent as the administration has painted it. There was at the very least a powerful inside player with access to a host of elements in our command structure, in order to have orchestrated this attack. We're looking at a masterminded scheme, but the official story is not a masterminded scheme, it's a bunch of whackos with knives.

No nut here. Just letting you know, I say it because I think, after a ton of digging, that it is so. If you dig, you'll eventually come to the same conclusion. This may explain why I'm less gung ho than you. Bear this in mind: A lot of those people who are gung ho on Iraq think that Hussein and 9-11 were connected. We can debate whether the vice president set it up to increase the chance that people would draw that conclusion, but they believe it. And it effects their decisions.

It's dangerous to believe something which isn't true, a mistake I try never to make. I'm not a fellow traveler of the conspiracy nut circle. I don't believe aliens are buried underground in area 51. But I think that the real answer to 9-11 is pretty appalling, and it has tremendous implications. I was, btw, the one of the last members of my local republican community to be convinced. I think there are still two left. To me, their heads are in the sand.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, September 16, 2006 1:58 PM

DREAMTROVE


Thanks for the backup HK,

I'm really quite sure I'm right about this, as are a good number of the people in our govt., including a decent portion of the senate and house members, and a number of Bush's own former cabinet members.

And these are not guys who believe in UFOs fake moon landings or the pearl harbor-log conspiracy. They might believe the vince foster scenario, as do I.

This is a giant elephant in the room. You can't say this sort of thing without proof, and there will never be CSI-style proof, all the hard evidence was destroyed by the event itself, but it's a case loaded with tons of really convincing circumstantial evidence. So much that it makes Oj's guilt seem iffy by comparison. (it's not iffy)

I really argued for the official story. I batted some emails back and forth with people, and eventually I was forced to gave. The evidence is overwhelmingly on what would generally be called the tinfoil hat side of things. But there's no tinfoil hat on this one. Sure, those ufo nuts have 9-11 conspiracies which they've posted ad nauseum, clouding the field with erroneous junk. probably 90% of whats out there is erroneous junk. Which is why it took me so long to be convinced. But strip it all away and eventually you have to look at what's staring back at you and say "okay, if I were a betting man, which side is this more like to fall on?" And the answer to that, for anyone who has spend enough time on it, is clear. There's no way to carry out these attacks without at least one guy on the inside. If I were playing odds, I'd say it took several guys on the inside, a bundle of bombs, and a sweet window of opportunity. Or two.

The official story is conspiracy theory hogwash in a classic tinfoil hat manner. The fact that the administration sticks to the layout events which are completely impausible, casts a big shadow of suspicion their way. It's possible that they are just immensely stupid, and are being played by a conspirator in their ranks. It's very possible. But I'm placing my wager, and I'd say odd are at least better than even that at least the VP was aware that it was done.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, September 16, 2006 1:59 PM

HARDWARE


Quote:

America was attacked. Every single one of us. Playing partisan politics only allows the enemy more room to roam, and distracts us from doing what is needed to defeat those animals.

Pot to Kettle, Pot to Kettle, you are black, over.

The more I get to know people the more I like my dogs.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, September 16, 2006 2:00 PM

AURAPTOR

America loves a winner!


We know who the enemey is,and why they hit us. They've said as much , time and time again. Problem is, we don't listen. That is to say, we don't pay attention to them. Too many think .. " Naww, they don't REALLY feel that way. Those Islamo-nuts are just acting boastful, sounding off. That's not what they REALLY feel. "

The hell isn't. Now, when Kim Jong-Il says that N.Korea could fire it's rockets and burn LA, NY , etc..to the ground, ya take notice...but you know it'll never happen. He's being cocky ( and nuts ) because he knows CHina has his back. He's just talkin' shit. Not so w/ al Qaeda/ Islamo-nutcase types.

Opponents ARE as bad as this enemy, and I'll tell you way. We're fighting TERRORISTS. Not a giant standing military forcde, but a bunch of nuts who love death more than we love life ( or so they hope ) Their main weapon IS 'terror'. And part of their goal is to what ?. Get people to distrust their Gov't. When conspiracy whackos start off w/ wild ass rumors that aren't ever substantiated, they're DOING TYHE VERY JOB OF THE TERRORISTS FOR THEM!

Sorry, I'm not wasting any more time on this.


People love a happy ending. So every episode, I will explain once again that I don't like people. And then Mal will shoot someone. Someone we like. And their puppy. - Joss

" They don't like it when you shoot at 'em. I worked that out myself. "

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, September 16, 2006 3:37 PM

DREAMTROVE


Quote:
Those Islamo-nuts are just acting boastful, sounding off. That's not what they REALLY feel.


Auraptor,

Oh, it's absolutely what they feel. I think you don't get where I'm coming from. Or where any of these people who say this sort of thing are coming from.
I'm not your enemy, or even your opponent. Just a guy with his ear to the ground. I think that's Denial, and possibly Anger.

Quote:
Get people to distrust their Gov't. When conspiracy whackos start off w/ wild ass rumors that aren't ever substantiated, they're DOING TYHE VERY JOB OF THE TERRORISTS FOR THEM!


I just wanted to say, I think this is nuts.

BTW, I think you're probably right about Kim Jong Il, but I'd hate to bet my life on it.

Enjoy president Hillary, because that's what this insanity is actually creating. In the real world, Osama bin Laden and Al Qaeda are not about to burst down your door, whether we do anything or not. Not today, not tomorrow, not ever. It's way out of their capability. But president Hillary is a very real possibility. All that she really needs is everyone to believe republicans are loonytunes.

And, quite frankly, looking at this hogwash rhetoric and the actions that go with it, even if Bush weren't a terrorist, I think a trained monkey could come to that conclusion.

And, as a bonus, we've really upped Al Qaeda recruitment, and lost a war in Afghanistan. This means there's a nation out there which really really hates us. (The Taliban were pretty bad, but they didn't really hate us.)

Rrrr. Just at a loss for words. This is just so far in the wrong direction. You do know that these neocons are not conservatives right? If they dished out horse$#!+, would you eat it? Cause that's what they're serving.




NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, September 16, 2006 4:41 PM

AURAPTOR

America loves a winner!


They attacked us in '93 and in '01. They really really hated us long before we went into Afghanistan. I don't care how much 'more' they hate us, it's irrelevent. We must kill them. That's the only way to win.

People love a happy ending. So every episode, I will explain once again that I don't like people. And then Mal will shoot someone. Someone we like. And their puppy. - Joss

" They don't like it when you shoot at 'em. I worked that out myself. "

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, September 16, 2006 6:10 PM

HKCAVALIER


Quote:
Originally posted by AURaptor:
And part of their goal is to what ?. Get people to distrust their Gov't.
:hangs head: WTF? Where do you get this, excuse me, nonesense? The goal of terrorism is to make the enemy distrust their government? It's clear that you actually believe that's what's going on in this country, but has that EVER happened anywhere else on earth in the history of the world???

How about this: it's the goal of fascists to criminalize dissent.

HKCavalier

Hey, hey, hey, don't be mean. We don't have to be mean, because, remember, no matter where you go, there you are.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, September 16, 2006 6:27 PM

AURAPTOR

America loves a winner!


Quote:
Originally posted by HKCavalier:
Quote:
Originally posted by AURaptor:
And part of their goal is to what ?. Get people to distrust their Gov't.
:hangs head: WTF? Where do you get this, excuse me, nonesense? The goal of terrorism is to make the enemy distrust their government? It's clear that you actually believe that's what's going on in this country, but has that EVER happened anywhere else on earth in the history of the world???

How about this: it's the goal of fascists to criminalize dissent.
.


How many times are you going to take my words and twist them. Take into account what the topic is, and what I'm talking about. Per the TERRORISTS, it's their goal to destablilize the Gov't for their own benefit. We'll agree that there's much w/ the US Gov't that needs fixing, and we'll deal w/ that stuff. But to say we weren't attacked by who we were attacked by, and then claim it was the Gov't who was behind all this, is utter nonsense. That is playing into the Islamists hands. The threat is real because tyey're not threatening to attack us, they've promised to.

People love a happy ending. So every episode, I will explain once again that I don't like people. And then Mal will shoot someone. Someone we like. And their puppy. - Joss

" They don't like it when you shoot at 'em. I worked that out myself. "

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, September 16, 2006 7:18 PM

HKCAVALIER


Quote:
Originally posted by AURaptor:
How many times are you going to take my words and twist them. Take into account what the topic is, and what I'm talking about. Per the TERRORISTS, it's their goal to destablilize the Gov't for their own benefit.
AURaptor, I think you might benefit from taking just a smidge of the responsibility when people misunderstand your rhetoric. I'm not the only one that finds your method of argument a little...well, unstable.

Destabilize the government, you say? And how they gonna do that, exactly?

There is perhaps an argument to be made that inspiring our goverment to abridge civil liberties and centralize power in the executive branch is, in the long run, destabilizing the nation, but I don't think that's the argument you're trying to make here.

I can tell you that I have a goal to jog all the way to the moon, but it don't mean it can be done. Beyond the power to kill and demoralize, terrorists have no power beyond what we grant them. And Bush et al. have given these terrorists more political clout than any government has given terrorists outside of George Orwell's book on the subject. Terrorists want publicity, they want their cockamamie ideas heard, and Bush is quoting freakin' OBL in his addresses to the nation last week!

Quote:
The threat is real because tyey're not threatening to attack us, they've promised to.
AURaptor, I'm sorry, but this is precious. What power do their promises have exactly? Saddam Hussein promised to kick our asses out of Baghdad, too, didn't he? When you look up "empty rhetoric" in the dictionary...well, you know the rest, 'cause you wrote the entry yourself--c'mon, admit it!

HKCavalier

Hey, hey, hey, don't be mean. We don't have to be mean, because, remember, no matter where you go, there you are.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, September 16, 2006 9:32 PM

OLDENGLANDDRY


Quote:
Originally posted by AURaptor:
We must kill them. That's the only way to win."





WOW.
That has got to be the stupidist thing I have ever heard.
Last man standing wins? You should aply for a job in the Pentagon.

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Sunday, September 17, 2006 12:34 AM

AURAPTOR

America loves a winner!


HK....keep that head firmly implanted in the sand. That's all I have to say

People love a happy ending. So every episode, I will explain once again that I don't like people. And then Mal will shoot someone. Someone we like. And their puppy. - Joss

" They don't like it when you shoot at 'em. I worked that out myself. "

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Sunday, September 17, 2006 12:38 AM

AURAPTOR

America loves a winner!


Quote:
Originally posted by oldenglanddry:
Quote:
Originally posted by AURaptor:
We must kill them. That's the only way to win."



WOW.
That has got to be the stupidist thing I have ever heard.
Last man standing wins? You should aply for a job in the Pentagon.



Well, it's true. Sorry. These folks won't be negotiating - ever. I conductd a poll on another thread, asking this question.


The Islmao-fascist will stop trying to kill us when?

a) when u.s. forces get out of Iraq
b) when the u.s. stops supporting Israel
c) when we end women's sufferage and make them 2nd class citizens.
d) when we force homosexuals back into the closet.
e) when all of the above are met and we submit to the will of Allah.

People love a happy ending. So every episode, I will explain once again that I don't like people. And then Mal will shoot someone. Someone we like. And their puppy. - Joss

" They don't like it when you shoot at 'em. I worked that out myself. "

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Sunday, September 17, 2006 4:07 AM

DREAMTROVE


Auraptor,

Okay, this is not to gang up, and I do believe you actually believe what you say, I just think you're mistaken.

Quote:
We must kill them. That's the only way to win.


Sounds like John Kerry. No, it's not. Even Bush et al admit that it's not the case.
IMHO, OBL can go on and do his own thing just like Gerry Adams as long as we can reach an agreement of mutual interest. I believe him when he say he had nothing to do with 9-11, which doesn't benefit him to say. (He's worshipped as a god in the ME because they think he did it.) But I also believe him when he says the US must be out of the ME, and Israel must be destroyed and Europe must make Islam-friendly laws - I just think he's wrong about all three. But somewhere there an agreement must be reached, since this war can never end.

Quote:
They attacked us in '93


Clinton attacked us in '93. In Waco. In the WTC? Maybe Clinton did that also. I have no proof of that, but I have no proof of the other either.

Quote:
But to say we weren't attacked by who we were attacked by


Did I say this? No. I said that we don't know, and that who ever attacked us did so with inside help. Any detailed analysis of the situation will reach this conclusion. Was it completely an inside job? Maybe. Did it have anything to do with OBL? No, I doubt it. Did it have anything to do with muslim terrorists? Probably. Someone had to hijack airplanes. But who led this attack? We don't know. I'm sure that this person had at least one high ranking govt. official on their side. I'll guarantee it. If you examine what happened closely, there is no other way this could have gone down. I strongly suspect it took about half a dozen insider 'terrorists' in order to pull this off.

But logically, those who attacked us are those who attacked us, whoever they are.

Quote:
it's their goal to destablilize the Gov't for


No thoughtful debate, discussion, investigation or other excercise of free speech will destabilize a free society. In fact, the cold war showed us that bombardment with endless propoganda will not destabilize a free society, so this PoV is completely unfounded.

But worse than that...

The underlying premise is completely absurd. Al Qaeda in a mental comparison to the USSR is like a schoolyard bully in comparison to the armies of Mordor. If combatting the Soviets didn't mean we had to curtail free speech, then certainly this doesn't. My own fear of OBL is pretty close to zero. If he showed up at the door, we'd probably have an argument like this one. He'd say that it was dangerous for ideas other than the word of God (Islam) to be allowed to exist in society, that dissent needed to be silenced. I'd probably fruitlessly try to show that in a free society Islam could exist side by side with other beliefs which were seemingly incompatible.

Quote:
You should aply for a job in the Pentagon.


I suspect he already has one. That or a defense contractor job.

Quote:
when we force homosexuals back into the closet.


I'll take this one. If Al Qaeda with agree to peace in exchange for supression of homosexuality, I'll take it :) okay, admittedly, that's not fair. But it's hardly an absurd position. It's one a large portion of the american public support.

I think that OBL started Al Qaeda to end western aggression against his territory, and they would be perfectly willing to draw the line at having that accomplished.

I believe I had this same argument with Finn a while back, and his position was less extreme that your "they will never negotiate", he said "we need something to negotiate with." I can see that point. If we fail to convince AQ that we can take their land, or put them out of business, they may not negotiate. Why negotiate if you expect to win? But assuming we have a reasonably stong hand, they will accept a truce on the grounds of a certain level of non-interference. Which, BTW, is completely within their rights. Any people have the right to an unhindered development. We don't live in a society that believes in colonialism or slavery, even if our govt. does believe in those things.


NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Sunday, September 17, 2006 5:01 AM

KANEMAN


Quote:
Originally posted by AURaptor:
dream...truly sorry to hear of any losses to your, friends, family, etc...but to say Bush attacked us is flat out bullshit. Furthermore, by accusing your own President, you ignore the very danger which actually committed this crime. Islamic fascists. Stick your head in the sand all you want, but it doesn't change the facts.

Conspiracy nuts are as dangerous as the Islmaic terrorist, imo.

People love a happy ending. So every episode, I will explain once again that I don't like people. And then Mal will shoot someone. Someone we like. And their puppy. - Joss

" They don't like it when you shoot at 'em. I worked that out myself. "



Yep, Read the 9/11 commission's report. They do not claim terrorists are a threat, they claim Islamic extremists are the enemy. And they single out "Islamic". No mention or care about other terrorist groups... just Islamic groups. This conspiracy stuff is a ridiculous 20 second porno clip for a liberal circle jerk. Anyone who even brings it up is a suspected moron in my book and should be hanged by his pecker for "Conspiracy to commit treason with his head in his ass"....Well, it's true

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Sunday, September 17, 2006 5:13 AM

KANEMAN


Quote:
Originally posted by oldenglanddry:
Quote:
Originally posted by AURaptor:
We must kill them. That's the only way to win."





WOW.
That has got to be the stupidist thing I have ever heard.
Last man standing wins? You should aply for a job in the Pentagon.


What would you have us do, have open dialogues with them? You know that is NEVER going to happen. Go read the Islamic rhetoric, read what their goals are, read their threats, and look at what happens when we back off. If you think that comment was the stupidest thing you have ever read, you are a victim of extremism. Whether it is religious or political, extremism makes irrational asses of everyone...You obviously suffer from this horrid disease. Go get a backbone, take head out of ass, and get plenty of rest...you will feel better in a day or two....Well, it's true


PS. It's us or Islamic extremists. There is no middle ground...pick your poison.

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Sunday, September 17, 2006 6:28 AM

DREAMTROVE


Kaneman,

By "us" you clearly mean the neocon commie agenda. Commies or terrorists. Hmmm. That's like saying, Death by tortuer, or death by dismemberment, you gotta choose no middle ground.


NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Sunday, September 17, 2006 7:30 AM

KANEMAN


Quote:
Originally posted by dreamtrove:
Kaneman,

By "us" you clearly mean the neocon commie agenda. Commies or terrorists. Hmmm. That's like saying, Death by tortuer, or death by dismemberment, you gotta choose no middle ground.




Actually, I mean all civilized nations with some sort of tolerance for differences in religion or politics. I am certain that we went into Iraq because the UN deemed Saddam a threat . That being said, the middle east must be de-radicalized. If the governments already in place do not rein in terrorists and their cohorts, they need to be replaced. It is world war three. Islomo-extremist barbarism vs. Western Civilization. And the western countries (as France recently found out) that think they can stay neutral will find themselves cut by the sword of Allah....Well, it's true

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Sunday, September 17, 2006 12:09 PM

HKCAVALIER


Quote:
Originally posted by AURaptor:
The Islmao-fascist will stop trying to kill us when?

a) when u.s. forces get out of Iraq
b) when the u.s. stops supporting Israel
c) when we end women's sufferage and make them 2nd class citizens.
d) when we force homosexuals back into the closet.
e) when all of the above are met and we submit to the will of Allah.


There are a lot of folks in the world who want to kill other folks, but the answer is seldom if ever found in waging wars. Wars are faught over resources, not ideologies. Wars are won by factions, not cultures. ideologies are merely used to control the hearts and minds of the people. Your heart and mind seem to have been won over long ago.

War is not the panacea you ignorantly proclaim it to be.

War is not a solution to the problem of terrorism.

Not waging war against other countries, is not the equivalent of "doing nothing" about terrorism.

You like to frame this debate as a choice between "negotiating" and "killing them all," but not only are there plenty of other choices, these two that you constantly mention are both equally flawed; neither will work against a terrorist threat.

AURaptor, it is impossible to end terrorism, just as it's impossible to end crime. We can however reduce crime and we can reduce terrorism. But just as capital punishment is a highly questionable deterent, so starting World War III to curb terrorism is a less than optimal strategy. There are arguments to be made that both methods actually exasorbate the problems they purport to address.

HKCavalier

Hey, hey, hey, don't be mean. We don't have to be mean, because, remember, no matter where you go, there you are.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Sunday, September 17, 2006 1:00 PM

DREAMTROVE


Kaneman,

Come on. Since when did the US do anything that cost us a trillion dollars? Since... um, never. And that's the way it should be. US can act because it is threatened, or because the greater good is served, ie. least death rule.

Saddam was a socialist ass and a threat to everyone in the region. Pre-emptive war is never acceptable. Just calling it as I sees it.

The ME deradicalized would be
a) probably a good idea
b) none of our business
c) not what we're doing right now
d) all of the above.

Obviously. d. but Western civilization has just been destroyed. I don't know what you're looking at, but I'm looking at a fascist third world dictatorship who uses the name 'America' but doesn't at all resemble the country that Ronald Reagan ruled. In fact, it's more than half way to being the soviet union, which Reagan called an "evil empire."

And it was taken by a bunch of people who admit to being themselves former communists. All of this is not rocket science.

USA needs to come back and clean house, because the dominant force in the world currently is East Asia, and the most powerful nation, Communist China. Do you think for one second, that if the commies had invaded afghanistan that there would still be fighting? We've de facto lost a war in afghanistan. We control some blocks of the capital city and that's about it. 4 years. If China invaded everyone would be wearing red at the end of the fourth week.

And this isn't a good thing. It's bad. The left is fond of saying "Bush drove the USA into a ditch" probably because then they imply "we'll tow you out." But it's much worse than that. Bush and Clinton together drove this country over a cliff.

I don't disagree with you about the islamites, but this is not our problem. The whole social militarist idea is very left wing.


HK, well said.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

YOUR OPTIONS

NEW POSTS TODAY

USERPOST DATE

OTHER TOPICS

DISCUSSIONS
The Hill: Democrats and the lemmings of the left
Thu, December 12, 2024 08:11 - 13 posts
Elections; 2024
Thu, December 12, 2024 01:38 - 4931 posts
COUP...TURKEY
Wed, December 11, 2024 21:38 - 40 posts
Dana Loesch Explains Why Generation X Put Trump In The White House
Wed, December 11, 2024 21:21 - 7 posts
Alien Spaceship? Probably Not: CIA Admits it’s Behind (Most) UFO Sightings
Wed, December 11, 2024 21:18 - 27 posts
IRAN: Kamala Harris and Biden's war?
Wed, December 11, 2024 19:34 - 18 posts
Countdown Clock Until Vladimir Putins' Rule Ends
Wed, December 11, 2024 19:32 - 158 posts
A.I Artificial Intelligence AI
Wed, December 11, 2024 19:04 - 251 posts
Who hates Israel?
Wed, December 11, 2024 19:02 - 77 posts
In the garden, and RAIN!!! (2)
Wed, December 11, 2024 17:59 - 4839 posts
Jesus christ... Can we outlaw the fuckin' drones already?
Wed, December 11, 2024 17:55 - 3 posts
Turkey as the new Iran
Wed, December 11, 2024 17:42 - 45 posts
 VIEW MORE TOPICS 

FFF.NET SOCIAL