| Topic: |
Religions > Atheism |
| User: |
"" |
| Date: |
18 Mar 2006 11:59:12 PM |
| Object: |
Unhappy Birthday |
Some things don't change.
http://groups.google.com/group/talk.origins/browse_frm/thread/7ba169c4a45e446a/a339ab8e3f49d119?lnk=st&q=country+ashamed+group%3Atalk.origins+author%3Athompson&rnum=1&hl=en#a339ab8e3f49d119
http://tinyurl.com/q9rga
Sorry.
Chris
.
|
|
| User: "Inez" |
|
| Title: Re: Unhappy Birthday |
19 Mar 2006 10:20:49 PM |
|
|
wrote:
Some things don't change.
http://groups.google.com/group/talk.origins/browse_frm/thread/7ba169c4a45e446a/a339ab8e3f49d119?lnk=st&q=country+ashamed+group%3Atalk.origins+author%3Athompson&rnum=1&hl=en#a339ab8e3f49d119
http://tinyurl.com/q9rga
Sorry.
Chris
I find it interesting that the Iraq war features conservatives backing
what is essentially a vast social program for the people of Iraq, and
liberals opposing it. Someone much cleverer than myself could possibly
think of a way to get conservatives to support social programs for our
own people. Perhaps if we drove tanks down the streets of the ghettos
first, or something of that nature.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Marc" |
|
| Title: Re: Unhappy Birthday |
19 Mar 2006 06:05:20 AM |
|
|
wrote:
Some things don't change.
http://groups.google.com/group/talk.origins/browse_frm/thread/7ba169c4a45e446a/a339ab8e3f49d119?lnk=st&q=country+ashamed+group%3Atalk.origins+author%3Athompson&rnum=1&hl=en#a339ab8e3f49d119
http://tinyurl.com/q9rga
Sorry.
Chris
On the night the war started, I went to see The Boss in
a live concert here in Sydney. It was very strange.
Friends of mine who had seen concerts by Springsteen
back in the 70's had raved about the experience but I
had not had a chance until that night of Shock and Awe.
Certainly I had some of his earlier records as I grew up, and
being from NJ there were certain aspects of his songs that
only those of us from the garden state can relate to, but with
some time over in Europe and down in the islands off Puerto
Rico, and then with a couple of decades here in Sydney I was
just not in the right place when The Boss was touring. Then
he came to Sydney and it was right around my birthday that
tickets were on sale, so - Iraq or no Iraq, I was going.
It seems that Springsteen and his band have been here in
Sydney before, back in the days before modern noise laws
toned down concerts, so it wasn't as loud as it would have
been, but - considering the evening - he started with a strong
anti-war statement delivered in acoustic fashion building up
into his version of Edwin Starr's classic "War". Everybody
there knew how strange a night it was, bombs falling all
over Iraq and live feeds from CNN after all the buildup, and
here we all were, off to a rock concert that night. It had a
mood like no other concert could have had - even Woodstock.
As the concert went on into the evening, I found myself up
on my chair holding up a 3'x5' stars and strips from time
to time, torn between respect for the events of the evening
and wanting to show Bruce and his band that there were
some homeboys in the crowd. I did look around a few times
for any other american flag and certainly didn't see one - it
is likely mine was the only one the band would have seen
that night. (I was just to the right of the centre out in the
Sydney Cricket Ground field, well within sight of the stage.)
Had it been a normal concert and not one on *that* night,
I would have worn the flag like superman's cape on my
way back to the central railway station and then on the
train to parramatta. As things were, the flag went back
in my bag once the concert ended. It was so very strange.
(signed) marc
Note:
I hope one day a future president in the white house will
release the discussion transcripts of the pre-war bush
cabinet meetings - the one's that bush has declared to
be a never-ending secret. Unless the truth is one day able
to be told, bush and his advisors will have killed the true
nature of what America was created to - and ought to - be.
mb.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Richard Clayton" |
|
| Title: Re: Unhappy Birthday |
19 Mar 2006 11:27:05 AM |
|
|
wrote:
Some things don't change.
http://groups.google.com/group/talk.origins/browse_frm/thread/7ba169c4a45e446a/a339ab8e3f49d119?lnk=st&q=country+ashamed+group%3Atalk.origins+author%3Athompson&rnum=1&hl=en#a339ab8e3f49d119
http://tinyurl.com/q9rga
Sorry.
When the war started, I lived and worked in a very conservative area.
Most of the people I knew were confident the war would be quick, easy,
and relatively bloodless. I said it would drag on for years, cost
billions of dollars and tens of thousands of lives, and that in the end
we'd really wish we hadn't done it. They called me a pessimist and
questioned my patriotism.
Sometimes I hate being right.
--
[The address listed is a spam trap. To reply, take off every zig.]
Richard Clayton
"During wars laws are silent." -- Cicero
.
|
|
|
| User: "Joe Cooper" |
|
| Title: Re: Unhappy Birthday |
19 Mar 2006 10:04:51 PM |
|
|
Richard Clayton wrote:
chris.linthompson@gmail.com wrote:
Some things don't change.
http://groups.google.com/group/talk.origins/browse_frm/thread/7ba169c4a45e446a/a339ab8e3f49d119?lnk=st&q=country+ashamed+group%3Atalk.origins+author%3Athompson&rnum=1&hl=en#a339ab8e3f49d119
http://tinyurl.com/q9rga
Sorry.
When the war started, I lived and worked in a very conservative area.
Most of the people I knew were confident the war would be quick, easy,
and relatively bloodless. I said it would drag on for years, cost
billions of dollars and tens of thousands of lives, and that in the end
we'd really wish we hadn't done it. They called me a pessimist and
questioned my patriotism.
Sometimes I hate being right.
--
[The address listed is a spam trap. To reply, take off every zig.]
Richard Clayton
"During wars laws are silent." -- Cicero
Personally I believed what Bush had to say about the WMD.
Anyone have a bridge to sell?
Joe Cooper
.
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: Unhappy Birthday |
19 Mar 2006 10:42:05 PM |
|
|
Joe Cooper wrote:
Richard Clayton wrote:
chris.linthompson@gmail.com wrote:
Some things don't change.
http://groups.google.com/group/talk.origins/browse_frm/thread/7ba169c4a45e446a/a339ab8e3f49d119?lnk=st&q=country+ashamed+group%3Atalk.origins+author%3Athompson&rnum=1&hl=en#a339ab8e3f49d119
http://tinyurl.com/q9rga
Sorry.
When the war started, I lived and worked in a very conservative area.
Most of the people I knew were confident the war would be quick, easy,
and relatively bloodless. I said it would drag on for years, cost
billions of dollars and tens of thousands of lives, and that in the end
we'd really wish we hadn't done it. They called me a pessimist and
questioned my patriotism.
Sometimes I hate being right.
--
[The address listed is a spam trap. To reply, take off every zig.]
Richard Clayton
"During wars laws are silent." -- Cicero
Personally I believed what Bush had to say about the WMD.
Anyone have a bridge to sell?
Joe Cooper
Lots of people believed it. Let's face it- what sort of President would
lie about that sort of threat to us? 9/11 was completely unprecedented
and it would take a truly unprincipled person to abuse that position of
power and trust to further his own agenda,
My scorn is reserved for those democrats in congress who were too
timid, or too mindful of their perceived political futures (Clinton?
Lieberman? You hear this?) to stand up to this ***** in the White
House.
Bridges are for sale to people who still trust that idiot. Not to
people who woke up to his schemes.
Chris
.
|
|
|
| User: "Mark Isaak" |
|
| Title: Re: Unhappy Birthday |
20 Mar 2006 04:43:26 PM |
|
|
On 19 Mar 2006 20:42:05 -0800, "chris.linthompson@gmail.com"
<chris.linthompson@gmail.com> wrote:
Joe Cooper wrote:
Richard Clayton wrote:
chris.linthompson@gmail.com wrote:
Some things don't change.
http://tinyurl.com/q9rga
Sorry.
When the war started, I lived and worked in a very conservative area.
Most of the people I knew were confident the war would be quick, easy,
and relatively bloodless. I said it would drag on for years, cost
billions of dollars and tens of thousands of lives, and that in the end
we'd really wish we hadn't done it. They called me a pessimist and
questioned my patriotism.
Sometimes I hate being right.
Personally I believed what Bush had to say about the WMD.
Anyone have a bridge to sell?
Lots of people believed it. Let's face it- what sort of President would
lie about that sort of threat to us? 9/11 was completely unprecedented
and it would take a truly unprincipled person to abuse that position of
power and trust to further his own agenda,
I believed the bit about Saddam having WMDs, too, but it has been
obvious from the beginning that WMDs are irrelevant. Iraq had no way
to deliver them past its immediate neighboring countries. Colin
Powell said as much when he addressed the UN to sell the war. Iraq
has never been a threat to the US. Why can so few people see that?
My scorn is reserved for those democrats in congress who were too
timid, or too mindful of their perceived political futures (Clinton?
Lieberman? You hear this?) to stand up to this ***** in the White
House.
My scorn is reserved for the Democrats, who are too timid to do
anything; the Republicans, who value loyaty to the Party far greater
than loyatly to the USA; the media, who know that they get more
attention by keeping the hysteria as high as possible; and the vast
majority of the people of the US, who fall for it all.
Bridges are for sale to people who still trust that idiot. Not to
people who woke up to his schemes.
I would love to hear, just once, a reporter say, "Bush responded to
this issue, but since we can't believe what he says anymore, there is
no point reporting what he said."
--
Mark Isaak eciton (at) earthlink (dot) net
"Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of
the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are
being attacked, and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and
exposing the country to danger." -- Hermann Goering
.
|
|
|
| User: "Fred Stone" |
|
| Title: Re: Unhappy Birthday |
20 Mar 2006 05:09:13 PM |
|
|
Mark Isaak <eciton@earthlinkNOSPAM.next> wrote in
news:nmbu12p7gc17h5rtjg8nnjdv803inmerg5@4ax.com:
On 19 Mar 2006 20:42:05 -0800, "chris.linthompson@gmail.com"
<chris.linthompson@gmail.com> wrote:
Joe Cooper wrote:
Richard Clayton wrote:
chris.linthompson@gmail.com wrote:
Some things don't change.
http://tinyurl.com/q9rga
Sorry.
When the war started, I lived and worked in a very
conservative area.
Most of the people I knew were confident the war would be quick,
easy, and relatively bloodless. I said it would drag on for years,
cost billions of dollars and tens of thousands of lives, and that
in the end we'd really wish we hadn't done it. They called me a
pessimist and questioned my patriotism.
Sometimes I hate being right.
Personally I believed what Bush had to say about the WMD.
Anyone have a bridge to sell?
Lots of people believed it. Let's face it- what sort of President
would lie about that sort of threat to us? 9/11 was completely
unprecedented and it would take a truly unprincipled person to abuse
that position of power and trust to further his own agenda,
I believed the bit about Saddam having WMDs, too, but it has been
obvious from the beginning that WMDs are irrelevant.
Saddam's *generals* all believed it. They were all just as shocked as
everybody else when they found out that they wouldn't have any nerve gas
to use against the Coalition invasion.
Iraq had no way
to deliver them past its immediate neighboring countries.
Irrelevant. They were required to disarm and to prove it, and they
didn't.
Colin
Powell said as much when he addressed the UN to sell the war. Iraq
has never been a threat to the US. Why can so few people see that?
Iraq financed and trained terrorists in the use of chemical weapons and
explosives. That fact alone made them a threat. Not to mention their
documented connections to al Qaeda groups, including those in the
Phillippines.
My scorn is reserved for those democrats in congress who were too
timid, or too mindful of their perceived political futures (Clinton?
Lieberman? You hear this?) to stand up to this ***** in the White
House.
My scorn is reserved for the Democrats, who are too timid to do
anything; the Republicans, who value loyaty to the Party far greater
than loyatly to the USA; the media, who know that they get more
attention by keeping the hysteria as high as possible; and the vast
majority of the people of the US, who fall for it all.
And you think you're not one of the gullible ones.
Bridges are for sale to people who still trust that idiot. Not to
people who woke up to his schemes.
I would love to hear, just once, a reporter say, "Bush responded to
this issue, but since we can't believe what he says anymore, there is
no point reporting what he said."
It has long since passed the point where we cannot believe anything the
reporters say.
--
Fred Stone
aa# 1369
"When people say they intend to kill you, take them seriously."
.
|
|
|
| User: "Mark Isaak" |
|
| Title: Re: Unhappy Birthday |
21 Mar 2006 11:43:40 AM |
|
|
On Mon, 20 Mar 2006 23:09:13 +0000 (UTC), Fred Stone
<fstone69@earthling.com> wrote:
Mark Isaak <eciton@earthlinkNOSPAM.next> wrote in
news:nmbu12p7gc17h5rtjg8nnjdv803inmerg5@4ax.com:
On 19 Mar 2006 20:42:05 -0800, "chris.linthompson@gmail.com"
<chris.linthompson@gmail.com> wrote:
Joe Cooper wrote:
Richard Clayton wrote:
chris.linthompson@gmail.com wrote:
Some things don't change.
http://tinyurl.com/q9rga
Sorry.
When the war started, I lived and worked in a very
conservative area.
Most of the people I knew were confident the war would be quick,
easy, and relatively bloodless. I said it would drag on for years,
cost billions of dollars and tens of thousands of lives, and that
in the end we'd really wish we hadn't done it. They called me a
pessimist and questioned my patriotism.
Sometimes I hate being right.
Personally I believed what Bush had to say about the WMD.
Anyone have a bridge to sell?
Lots of people believed it. Let's face it- what sort of President
would lie about that sort of threat to us? 9/11 was completely
unprecedented and it would take a truly unprincipled person to abuse
that position of power and trust to further his own agenda,
I believed the bit about Saddam having WMDs, too, but it has been
obvious from the beginning that WMDs are irrelevant.
Saddam's *generals* all believed it. They were all just as shocked as
everybody else when they found out that they wouldn't have any nerve gas
to use against the Coalition invasion.
Iraq had no way
to deliver them past its immediate neighboring countries.
Irrelevant. They were required to disarm and to prove it, and they
didn't.
Colin
Powell said as much when he addressed the UN to sell the war. Iraq
has never been a threat to the US. Why can so few people see that?
Iraq financed and trained terrorists in the use of chemical weapons and
explosives. That fact alone made them a threat. Not to mention their
documented connections to al Qaeda groups, including those in the
Phillippines.
By "fact," you mean incredible claim. And G.W. Bush had closer ties
to al Qaeda than Hussein did. But even if what you say were true, it
is still irrelevant. WMDs are next to worthless as terrorist weapons,
too. A terrorist with a knife is far more dangerous than a terrorist
with a WMD.
Remember the incident in 2002, when an Iraqi terrorist used WMDs to
attack the United States? No, you probably don't. WMD attacks just
aren't big enough to be newsworthy.
--
Mark Isaak eciton (at) earthlink (dot) net
"Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of
the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are
being attacked, and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and
exposing the country to danger." -- Hermann Goering
.
|
|
|
| User: "mcv" |
|
| Title: Re: Unhappy Birthday |
22 Mar 2006 09:55:05 AM |
|
|
In talk.origins Mark Isaak <eciton@earthlinknospam.next> wrote:
On Mon, 20 Mar 2006 23:09:13 +0000 (UTC), Fred Stone
<fstone69@earthling.com> wrote:
Mark Isaak <eciton@earthlinkNOSPAM.next> wrote in
news:nmbu12p7gc17h5rtjg8nnjdv803inmerg5@4ax.com:
Colin
Powell said as much when he addressed the UN to sell the war. Iraq
has never been a threat to the US. Why can so few people see that?
Iraq financed and trained terrorists in the use of chemical weapons and
explosives. That fact alone made them a threat. Not to mention their
documented connections to al Qaeda groups, including those in the
Phillippines.
By "fact," you mean incredible claim. And G.W. Bush had closer ties
to al Qaeda than Hussein did.
Is he going to invade the US? After all, the CIA originally trained
and equipped Bin Laden and his cronies.
mcv.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Fred Stone" |
|
| Title: Re: Unhappy Birthday |
22 Mar 2006 01:10:55 PM |
|
|
mcv <mcvmcv@xs4all.nl> wrote in news:44217359$0$11063
$e4fe514c@news.xs4all.nl:
In talk.origins Mark Isaak <eciton@earthlinknospam.next> wrote:
On Mon, 20 Mar 2006 23:09:13 +0000 (UTC), Fred Stone
<fstone69@earthling.com> wrote:
Mark Isaak <eciton@earthlinkNOSPAM.next> wrote in
news:nmbu12p7gc17h5rtjg8nnjdv803inmerg5@4ax.com:
Colin
Powell said as much when he addressed the UN to sell the war. Iraq
has never been a threat to the US. Why can so few people see that?
Iraq financed and trained terrorists in the use of chemical weapons
and
explosives. That fact alone made them a threat. Not to mention their
documented connections to al Qaeda groups, including those in the
Phillippines.
By "fact," you mean incredible claim. And G.W. Bush had closer ties
to al Qaeda than Hussein did.
Is he going to invade the US? After all, the CIA originally trained
and equipped Bin Laden and his cronies.
Wrong. In fact bin Laden "and his cronies" were never equipped by the
CIA, which was training Afghan native mujaheddin groups, not Saudis.
--
Fred Stone
aa# 1369
"When people say they intend to kill you, take them seriously."
.
|
|
|
| User: "AC" |
|
| Title: Re: Unhappy Birthday |
23 Mar 2006 01:07:05 PM |
|
|
On Wed, 22 Mar 2006 19:10:55 +0000 (UTC),
Fred Stone <fstone69@earthling.com> wrote:
mcv <mcvmcv@xs4all.nl> wrote in news:44217359$0$11063
$e4fe514c@news.xs4all.nl:
In talk.origins Mark Isaak <eciton@earthlinknospam.next> wrote:
On Mon, 20 Mar 2006 23:09:13 +0000 (UTC), Fred Stone
<fstone69@earthling.com> wrote:
Mark Isaak <eciton@earthlinkNOSPAM.next> wrote in
news:nmbu12p7gc17h5rtjg8nnjdv803inmerg5@4ax.com:
Colin
Powell said as much when he addressed the UN to sell the war. Iraq
has never been a threat to the US. Why can so few people see that?
Iraq financed and trained terrorists in the use of chemical weapons
and
explosives. That fact alone made them a threat. Not to mention their
documented connections to al Qaeda groups, including those in the
Phillippines.
By "fact," you mean incredible claim. And G.W. Bush had closer ties
to al Qaeda than Hussein did.
Is he going to invade the US? After all, the CIA originally trained
and equipped Bin Laden and his cronies.
Wrong. In fact bin Laden "and his cronies" were never equipped by the
CIA, which was training Afghan native mujaheddin groups, not Saudis.
So tell me, Fred, are the majority of Americans now treasonous as well? How
about the Republican party?
--
Aaron Clausen
mightymartianca@hotmail.com
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Fred Stone" |
|
| Title: Re: Unhappy Birthday |
21 Mar 2006 01:01:46 PM |
|
|
Mark Isaak <eciton@earthlinkNOSPAM.next> wrote in
news:hoe022dnj6mc5ed037fhft30h21t1l140u@4ax.com:
On Mon, 20 Mar 2006 23:09:13 +0000 (UTC), Fred Stone
<fstone69@earthling.com> wrote:
Mark Isaak <eciton@earthlinkNOSPAM.next> wrote in
news:nmbu12p7gc17h5rtjg8nnjdv803inmerg5@4ax.com:
On 19 Mar 2006 20:42:05 -0800, "chris.linthompson@gmail.com"
<chris.linthompson@gmail.com> wrote:
Joe Cooper wrote:
Richard Clayton wrote:
chris.linthompson@gmail.com wrote:
Some things don't change.
http://tinyurl.com/q9rga
Sorry.
When the war started, I lived and worked in a very
conservative area.
Most of the people I knew were confident the war would be quick,
easy, and relatively bloodless. I said it would drag on for
years, cost billions of dollars and tens of thousands of lives,
and that in the end we'd really wish we hadn't done it. They
called me a pessimist and questioned my patriotism.
Sometimes I hate being right.
Personally I believed what Bush had to say about the WMD.
Anyone have a bridge to sell?
Lots of people believed it. Let's face it- what sort of President
would lie about that sort of threat to us? 9/11 was completely
unprecedented and it would take a truly unprincipled person to abuse
that position of power and trust to further his own agenda,
I believed the bit about Saddam having WMDs, too, but it has been
obvious from the beginning that WMDs are irrelevant.
Saddam's *generals* all believed it. They were all just as shocked as
everybody else when they found out that they wouldn't have any nerve
gas to use against the Coalition invasion.
Iraq had no way
to deliver them past its immediate neighboring countries.
Irrelevant. They were required to disarm and to prove it, and they
didn't.
Colin
Powell said as much when he addressed the UN to sell the war. Iraq
has never been a threat to the US. Why can so few people see that?
Iraq financed and trained terrorists in the use of chemical weapons
and explosives. That fact alone made them a threat. Not to mention
their documented connections to al Qaeda groups, including those in
the Phillippines.
By "fact," you mean incredible claim.
By "incredible claim" you mean "mountains of evidence".
And G.W. Bush had closer ties to al Qaeda than Hussein did.
But even if what you say were true, it is still irrelevant.
And here comes the Liberal Denial Machine output.
WMDs are next to worthless as terrorist weapons,
too. A terrorist with a knife is far more dangerous than a terrorist
with a WMD.
That explains why al Qaeda wants them so badly.
Remember the incident in 2002, when an Iraqi terrorist used WMDs to
attack the United States? No, you probably don't. WMD attacks just
aren't big enough to be newsworthy.
So say the editors of the New York Times, and they dictate what every
liberal is allowed to know.
--
Fred Stone
aa# 1369
"When people say they intend to kill you, take them seriously."
.
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: Unhappy Birthday |
22 Mar 2006 02:07:24 PM |
|
|
Fred Stone wrote:
Mark Isaak <eciton@earthlinkNOSPAM.next> wrote in
news:hoe022dnj6mc5ed037fhft30h21t1l140u@4ax.com:
On Mon, 20 Mar 2006 23:09:13 +0000 (UTC), Fred Stone
<fstone69@earthling.com> wrote:
Mark Isaak <eciton@earthlinkNOSPAM.next> wrote in
news:nmbu12p7gc17h5rtjg8nnjdv803inmerg5@4ax.com:
<snip>
Iraq financed and trained terrorists in the use of chemical weapons
and explosives. That fact alone made them a threat. Not to mention
their documented connections to al Qaeda groups, including those in
the Phillippines.
By "fact," you mean incredible claim.
By "incredible claim" you mean "mountains of evidence".
Could you cite a link or paper for some persusaive evidence?
And G.W. Bush had closer ties to al Qaeda than Hussein did.
But even if what you say were true, it is still irrelevant.
And here comes the Liberal Denial Machine output.
We haven't talked in a while, Fred. I've been hanging out at
talk.origins, where the usual response to an unbelievable claim is a
link to evidence.
The September 11 Commission found no connection:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A47812-2004Jun16.html
Bush seems to deny a link in 2003:
http://www.thememoryhole.org/war/no-saddam-qaeda.htm
WMDs are next to worthless as terrorist weapons,
too. A terrorist with a knife is far more dangerous than a terrorist
with a WMD.
That explains why al Qaeda wants them so badly.
I agree that Osama with a nuke is a bad image. But I would suggest that
if they already had this, they would have used it. They probably have
plastic explosives and such on hand. Between their lack of imagination
and our somewhat heightened alertness they can't seem to get it over
here to the US, though. They attacked the USSS Cole with a small boat
and some explosives.
I would worry about biological attacks in the near future. In any
event, they got nothing from Saddam.
Remember the incident in 2002, when an Iraqi terrorist used WMDs to
attack the United States? No, you probably don't. WMD attacks just
aren't big enough to be newsworthy.
So say the editors of the New York Times, and they dictate what every
liberal is allowed to know.
I can't remember when I've read the NYT last. Years. Do you think you
are more persusive when you insult the target audience, or do you know
that you have nothing substantial, so you resort to insults to feel
better?
If you think the NYT and all those liberal rags are not getting the
important news, maybe you could offer an alternative?
--
Fred Stone
aa# 1369
"When people say they intend to kill you, take them seriously."
I always do. I don't hide under the bed, tho.
Kermit
.
|
|
|
| User: "Fred Stone" |
|
| Title: Re: Unhappy Birthday |
22 Mar 2006 02:46:06 PM |
|
|
wrote in
news:1143058044.835054.305450@e56g2000cwe.googlegroups.com:
Fred Stone wrote:
Mark Isaak <eciton@earthlinkNOSPAM.next> wrote in
news:hoe022dnj6mc5ed037fhft30h21t1l140u@4ax.com:
On Mon, 20 Mar 2006 23:09:13 +0000 (UTC), Fred Stone
<fstone69@earthling.com> wrote:
Mark Isaak <eciton@earthlinkNOSPAM.next> wrote in
news:nmbu12p7gc17h5rtjg8nnjdv803inmerg5@4ax.com:
<snip>
Iraq financed and trained terrorists in the use of chemical weapons
and explosives. That fact alone made them a threat. Not to mention
their documented connections to al Qaeda groups, including those in
the Phillippines.
By "fact," you mean incredible claim.
By "incredible claim" you mean "mountains of evidence".
Could you cite a link or paper for some persusaive evidence?
I sure can.
http://blogs.pajamasmedia.com/iraq_files/
Specifically on the Phillippines connection:
http://makeashorterlink.com/?F2E2227DC
And G.W. Bush had closer ties to al Qaeda than Hussein did.
But even if what you say were true, it is still irrelevant.
And here comes the Liberal Denial Machine output.
We haven't talked in a while, Fred. I've been hanging out at
talk.origins, where the usual response to an unbelievable claim is a
link to evidence.
The September 11 Commission found no connection:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A47812-2004Jun16.html
That's an old one.
They found no operational connection to the 9/11 attack.
They neither confirm nor deny other connections between Saddam and al
Qaeda.
Bush seems to deny a link in 2003:
http://www.thememoryhole.org/war/no-saddam-qaeda.htm
Same basic misquote.
WMDs are next to worthless as terrorist weapons,
too. A terrorist with a knife is far more dangerous than a
terrorist with a WMD.
That explains why al Qaeda wants them so badly.
I agree that Osama with a nuke is a bad image. But I would suggest
that if they already had this, they would have used it. They probably
have plastic explosives and such on hand. Between their lack of
imagination and our somewhat heightened alertness they can't seem to
get it over here to the US, though. They attacked the USSS Cole with a
small boat and some explosives.
I would worry about biological attacks in the near future. In any
event, they got nothing from Saddam.
There are documents in the "Iraq files" that indicate that Iraq was
providing training in the handling of poisons to terrorists.
Remember the incident in 2002, when an Iraqi terrorist used WMDs to
attack the United States? No, you probably don't. WMD attacks
just aren't big enough to be newsworthy.
So say the editors of the New York Times, and they dictate what every
liberal is allowed to know.
I can't remember when I've read the NYT last. Years. Do you think you
are more persusive when you insult the target audience, or do you know
that you have nothing substantial, so you resort to insults to feel
better?
If you think the NYT and all those liberal rags are not getting the
important news, maybe you could offer an alternative?
Certainly. These are all news aggregators:
http://www.pajamasmedia.com/
http://realclearpolitics.com/
http://threatswatch.org/
http://www.memeorandum.com/
And here is a site that does just the raw AP and Rooters feeds.
http://www.breitbart.com/
--
Fred Stone
aa# 1369
"When people say they intend to kill you, take them seriously."
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: Unhappy Birthday |
19 Mar 2006 12:32:21 PM |
|
|
Richard Clayton wrote:
chris.linthompson@gmail.com wrote:
Some things don't change.
http://groups.google.com/group/talk.origins/browse_frm/thread/7ba169c4a45e446a/a339ab8e3f49d119?lnk=st&q=country+ashamed+group%3Atalk.origins+author%3Athompson&rnum=1&hl=en#a339ab8e3f49d119
http://tinyurl.com/q9rga
Sorry.
When the war started, I lived and worked in a very conservative area.
Most of the people I knew were confident the war would be quick, easy,
and relatively bloodless. I said it would drag on for years, cost
billions of dollars and tens of thousands of lives, and that in the end
we'd really wish we hadn't done it. They called me a pessimist and
questioned my patriotism.
Sometimes I hate being right.
An absolutely amazing thing happened to me yesterday.
A good friend of mine, very conservative, listened to me talk about
Bush and the war for a moment or two, and actually said, "Well,
hindsight is 20/20".
I went ballistic.
Chris
--
[The address listed is a spam trap. To reply, take off every zig.]
Richard Clayton
"During wars laws are silent." -- Cicero
.
|
|
|
| User: "Richard Clayton" |
|
| Title: Re: Unhappy Birthday |
19 Mar 2006 12:52:49 PM |
|
|
wrote:
Richard Clayton wrote:
wrote:
Some things don't change.
http://groups.google.com/group/talk.origins/browse_frm/thread/7ba169c4a45e446a/a339ab8e3f49d119?lnk=st&q=country+ashamed+group%3Atalk.origins+author%3Athompson&rnum=1&hl=en#a339ab8e3f49d119
http://tinyurl.com/q9rga
Sorry.
When the war started, I lived and worked in a very conservative area.
Most of the people I knew were confident the war would be quick, easy,
and relatively bloodless. I said it would drag on for years, cost
billions of dollars and tens of thousands of lives, and that in the end
we'd really wish we hadn't done it. They called me a pessimist and
questioned my patriotism.
Sometimes I hate being right.
An absolutely amazing thing happened to me yesterday.
A good friend of mine, very conservative, listened to me talk about
Bush and the war for a moment or two, and actually said, "Well,
hindsight is 20/20".
I went ballistic.
Cartoonist David Simpson puts it better than I ever could:
http://idrewthis.org/oldthoughts05.html
The post to which I am referring is headed "Dumb and Dumberer," and at
the time I send this it is at the top of the page.
--
[The address listed is a spam trap. To reply, take off every zig.]
Richard Clayton
"During wars laws are silent." -- Cicero
.
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: Unhappy Birthday |
19 Mar 2006 04:15:25 PM |
|
|
Richard Clayton wrote:
chris.linthompson@gmail.com wrote:
Richard Clayton wrote:
chris.linthompson@gmail.com wrote:
Some things don't change.
http://groups.google.com/group/talk.origins/browse_frm/thread/7ba169c4a45e446a/a339ab8e3f49d119?lnk=st&q=country+ashamed+group%3Atalk.origins+author%3Athompson&rnum=1&hl=en#a339ab8e3f49d119
http://tinyurl.com/q9rga
Sorry.
When the war started, I lived and worked in a very conservative area.
Most of the people I knew were confident the war would be quick, easy,
and relatively bloodless. I said it would drag on for years, cost
billions of dollars and tens of thousands of lives, and that in the end
we'd really wish we hadn't done it. They called me a pessimist and
questioned my patriotism.
Sometimes I hate being right.
An absolutely amazing thing happened to me yesterday.
A good friend of mine, very conservative, listened to me talk about
Bush and the war for a moment or two, and actually said, "Well,
hindsight is 20/20".
I went ballistic.
Cartoonist David Simpson puts it better than I ever could:
http://idrewthis.org/oldthoughts05.html
The post to which I am referring is headed "Dumb and Dumberer," and at
the time I send this it is at the top of the page.
Down with dumb!
I'm all for it.
Chris
--
[The address listed is a spam trap. To reply, take off every zig.]
Richard Clayton
"During wars laws are silent." -- Cicero
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Robert Carnegie" |
|
| Title: Re: Unhappy Birthday |
19 Mar 2006 05:28:29 PM |
|
|
Richard Clayton wrote:
chris.linthompson@gmail.com wrote:
Richard Clayton wrote:
chris.linthompson@gmail.com wrote:
Some things don't change.
http://groups.google.com/group/talk.origins/browse_frm/thread/7ba169c4a45e446a/a339ab8e3f49d119?lnk=st&q=country+ashamed+group%3Atalk.origins+author%3Athompson&rnum=1&hl=en#a339ab8e3f49d119
http://tinyurl.com/q9rga
Sorry.
When the war started, I lived and worked in a very conservative area.
Most of the people I knew were confident the war would be quick, easy,
and relatively bloodless. I said it would drag on for years, cost
billions of dollars and tens of thousands of lives, and that in the end
we'd really wish we hadn't done it. They called me a pessimist and
questioned my patriotism.
Sometimes I hate being right.
An absolutely amazing thing happened to me yesterday.
A good friend of mine, very conservative, listened to me talk about
Bush and the war for a moment or two, and actually said, "Well,
hindsight is 20/20".
I went ballistic.
Cartoonist David Simpson puts it better than I ever could:
http://idrewthis.org/oldthoughts05.html
The post to which I am referring is headed "Dumb and Dumberer," and at
the time I send this it is at the top of the page.
What, he posts four times a year or something?
Anyway, the part I have trouble processing is where he claims Americans
must have a natural sense to detect when a politician is lying to them
because his was set off when they /started/ shock and awe. But if the
American public all sensed that the administration was lying to them,
why did they suck it up?
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
