Whether you agree or not...

[JUGGERNAUT]

Nice speech. And if I believed the premise was true, that attacking Iraq scared away terrorists from this country, I would even believe it. If we are so effective fighting terrorism by attacking Iraq, then why am I taking my shoes off to ride an airplane? Why have we accepted random searches on public transportation? Why have we given the government even more powers to spy on us?

 

The problem with looking at Germany is they are a country, with clear chains of command, national boundaries, and other factors that make a war possible. Terrorists are McVeigh, bin Laden, etc. You can't remove the tumor by removing the chest. There is crime in America, bombing the place will not solve the crime problem. Terrorists are criminals, not soldiers.

 

I agree we have done some nice things for the Iraqi people. After we bankrupt our country re-building the stuff we tore down, they will have a nice country.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

I disagree. There is a vast difference between McVeigh & Bin Laden. How many people would follow McV to their death? Maybe a handful at best. How many people would follow Bin Laden to their death? Millions.

 

A cancerous virus is a good analogy for Al-Queda & Jihad International. It breeds amongst us because we the body can not easily distinguish it as a threat. Chemo is the response. We risk harm to the body's immune system in an effort to control & weaken the threat. We risk harm to civilians in an effort to combat Al-Queda & JI. A failure to do so threatens the very life of the body itself.

[Texsox]

Terrorists are all around us, not sitting in one country. By spreading too many our resources in one area, we are more at risk, than less. While Iraq sends a signal to countries, it does little to sway terrorists.

[JUGGERNAUT]

Terrorists are all around us, not sitting in one country. By spreading too many our resources in one area, we are more at risk, than less. While Iraq sends a signal to countries, it does little to sway terrorists.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Very true. But you can only treat that which you know about. If the world is the body then the places where the terrorists are most prevalent are Afghanistan & Iraq. We are applying the best techniques we know of to combat both. You can't sway terrorists any more than you can sway a cancerous virus. All you can do is try to keep weeding it out.

 

But

 

In the same token by which we can use genetics to help cells resist cancerous viruses we should use diplomacy to sway good people from joining terrorist movements. That's not easy for it means we have to address the causes for which they attack us in the first place. That could have an impact on our capitalist ideology as well as our feminist campaigns.

[Balta1701]

O'Reilly said yesterday that he never directly equated her actions to treason but whatever.  O'Reilly seems surprisingly a lot more reasonable than that other anchor John Gibson.

    O'REILLY: Well, I have to say that she obviously does because she's the lead story on Michael Moore's Web site on an almost daily basis. And she knows -- I mean, Michael Moore isn't a subtle guy. Everybody knows where he stands.

 

    So I mean, I think Mrs. Sheehan bears some responsibility for this and also for the responsibility of other American families who have lost sons and daughters in Iraq, who feel that this kind of behavior borders on treasonous.

 

    You know, you got to think about those people as well. What about their feelings?

 

    [...]

 

    O'REILLY: She has thrown in -- there is no question that she has thrown in with the most radical elements in this country. That is -- now, it happened before. Some of the 9-11 families also took this road, you'll remember, and are still active to this day. There's a big controversy about the 9-11 Museum down at the World Trade Center.

 

    And, you know, there are some people who hate this government, hate their country right now, and blaming Bush for all the terrorism and all the horror in the world.

 

    Here's a question, Michelle. Do they have a right to this opinion without being scorned?

 

    MALKIN: No, without being scorned, no. And I wouldn't call it scorned. I would call it scrutiny. And the mainstream media is not doing it. I mean, the New York Times editorial board is all too eager to prop her up as some sort of martyr and to buy her line when clearly her story hasn't checked out.

 

    O'REILLY: Yes, her story hasn't [sic] changed.

 

    MALKIN: And so I think -- and I think that angle you're emphasizing is absolutely right here, which is the mainstream media just lapping this up and perpetuating myths and inaccuracies when they know it's not the truth.

 

    O'REILLY: Yes. They don't identify -- in the New York Times editorial today, it was obvious they did not say her story has been inconsistent. And they did not pinpoint that she is in bed with the radical left.

Oh, so he didn't say that it was treasonous, he just cited some other group of unnamed people who he is sure think it is treasonous. Gotcha.

[The Ginger Kid]

Wow. I just realized I'm part of the radical left. Is this going on my permanent record?

[KipWellsFan]

As ghastly as Iraq is I want you to imagine a world in which Iraq is still under control of Saddam Hussein. How strong would Al-Queda be today in such a world?

 

And at the point that Bush was to say that everyone on the side polarized against the Bushies begins laughing their heads off at how stupid his statement was. You can't possibly be suggesting that Al-Qaeda has been reduced in power and verisimilitude since the removal of Saddam. Americans and the world over know Saddam wasn't and never would have been the largest threat to America because he wasn't one of the people who hate liberalism like Islamic extremists. In fact he was scared of Islamic extremists controlling the middle east instead of himself, resulting in the Iran-Iraq War. The removal of Hussein is good but for completely different reasons than you try to pawn off on us "Mr.President".

Edited August 18, 2005 by KipWellsFan

[KipWellsFan]

Wow. I just realized I'm part of the radical left. Is this going on my permanent record?

 

Be proud, you're among the likes of Hillary Clinton and John Kerry!

[Balta1701]

Very true.  But you can only treat that which you know about.  If the world is the body then the places where the terrorists are most prevalent are Afghanistan & Iraq.  We are applying the best techniques we know of to combat both.  You can't sway terrorists any more than you can sway a cancerous virus.  All you can do is try to keep weeding it out.

 

But

 

In the same token by which we can use genetics to help cells resist cancerous viruses we should use diplomacy to sway good people from joining terrorist movements.  That's not easy for it means we have to address the causes for which they attack us in the first place.  That could have an impact on our capitalist ideology as well as our feminist campaigns.

The 1 problem though is that you have to make sure your method of treating the cancer doesn't in fact cause more cancer cells to be created.

[Balta1701]

Wow. I just realized I'm part of the radical left. Is this going on my permanent record?

Yes. Now please step into the black vehicle with the tinted windows. The nice men in the white suits will take care of everything.

[Rex Kickass]

Apparently Rush Limbaugh is insinuating that Cindy Sheehan faked her sons death.

 

I mean, Cindy Sheehan is just Bill Burkett. Her story is nothing more than forged documents. There's nothing about it that's real, including the mainstream media's glomming onto it. It's not real. It's nothing more than an attempt. It's the latest effort made by the coordinated left.

[Texsox]

Apparently Rush Limbaugh is insinuating that Cindy Sheehan faked her sons death.

 

but these little babies these babies are real. I had my maid pick them up. I really enjoy Rush more knowing he's a recovering addict.

[EvilMonkey]

Apparently Rush Limbaugh is insinuating that Cindy Sheehan faked her sons death.

I think he is implying that her level of grief may be faked to further her own agenda, not that Casey never died.

[LowerCaseRepublican]

I think he is implying that her level of grief may be faked to further her own agenda, not that Casey never died.

Yeah, how dare she be sad after her only child got killed! Rush is such a f***ing ignorant tit.

[SoxFan562004]

Apparently Rush Limbaugh is insinuating that Cindy Sheehan faked her sons death.

Not a Limbaugh supporter or regular listener at all, but sometimes WLS is on my radios since I listen to Roe in the afternoon. Rush said that he 100% did not insinuate that she was faking his death, and challenges the people who are spreading this to find the quote.

 

Personally I think this woman is sad. Of course I feel bad for her for losing her son, but it was his choice to join the military, and the rest of the family seems to think she is wrong in doing this.

[Balta1701]

Not a Limbaugh supporter or regular listener at all, but sometimes WLS is on my radios since I listen to Roe in the afternoon.  Rush said that he 100% did not insinuate that she was faking his death, and challenges the people who are spreading this to find the quote.

I think he was just over-doing it (and not saying she faked his death) but the audio clip is here.

[Kid Gleason]

Yeah, how dare she be sad after her only child got killed!  Rush is such a f***ing ignorant tit.

 

Never, ever, in a million years compare Rush to something as lovely as a tit.

[Balta1701]

I think he was just over-doing it (and not saying she faked his death) but the audio clip is here.

Here's the text of Rush denying he ever said it...along with a screen capture of his own web page showing his text.

 

Liar

[YASNY]

From Rush:

 

They're actually out there, people saying that I am accusing Cindy Sheehan of making up the fact that she had a son and making up the fact that her son died in Iraq. And of course, I've never said this.

 

Show me where he said this, Balta.

[Rex Kickass]

Nope he called it "forged documents."

[Balta1701]

Nope he called it "forged documents."

I agree. So could someone defending Rush tell me what exactly she could have forged?

[Texsox]

What is exciting is how people are gathering there and adding to her voice. China would have removed her and the press never would have heard of her. I do not believe the President should ever be blackmailed into anything. However, I hope he hears their voices. All of our leaders should know that there is never 100% consensus in the real world. (Rush's loyal followers being the exception). Ditto.

[Balance]

O'Reilly, Limbaugh, et al. Paragons of truth and virtue, they.