ah yes change the rules.....JUST for us

[46zilzal]

http://www.cnn.com/2006/POLITICS/09/13/congress.tribunals/index.html

[Tom]

I would not waste time on a tribunual - just shoot the stinking bastards in the back of the head and drop them out of helicopters over the streets of Beruit.

[46zilzal]

Colin Powell, a voice of reason, speaks out again.
"The world is beginning to doubt the moral basis of our fight against terrorism," Powell said. "To redefine [a portion of the Geneva Convention] would add to those doubts."

or better yet, OTHER reasons that Powell was on the outs.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/martin-lewis/bush-agrees-with-colin-po_b_29451.html

[Lefty]

Once again the Pres is right. The Geneva convention only covers soldiers fighting in the uniform of a country. Not terrorists.

[JustRalph]

Once again the Pres is right. The Geneva convention only covers soldiers fighting in the uniform of a country. Not terrorists.

I don't know why, these damn Senators and other opposers.........can't understand this simple point? Amazing............

[Tom]

Where were these pukes when theses so-called "soliders" were violating the GC and beheading people? We should show any compassion for these mad dogs?

I say, do whatever it take to get them to talk, snd then do it for fun - make them die cursing mohamed for ignoring them.

[Secretariat]

I don't know why, these damn Senators and other opposers.........can't understand this simple point? Amazing............

Yeah, these libs like Colin Powell and John Warner. They're so far to the left.

[Lefty]

Yeah, these libs like Colin Powell and John Warner. They're so far to the left.
They're moderate and they are flat WRONG!

[Tom]

It is clear to me Collin has no stomach for waging war. Bush was right to dump him. He was a liability. Now he is just wrong.
We need people in there not afraid to tame dogs.

[Snag]

Yeah, these libs like Colin Powell and John Warner. They're so far to the left.

Not left Sec. Just wrong. And that does not make them right.

[46zilzal]

the King has no clothes and is getting fewer to believe his bull shit.
http://www.cnn.com/2006/POLITICS/09/14/congress.tribunals/index.html

[46zilzal]

Powell's letter to McCain.
http://www.newsday.com/news/nationworld/nation/ny-ustrib0915a,0,7313910.story?coll=ny-leadnationalnews-headlines

[Lefty]

the King has no clothes and is getting fewer to believe his bull shit.
http://www.cnn.com/2006/POLITICS/09/14/congress.tribunals/index.html
Yet the more GW talks the more his poll nos go up amongst the pipples.

[Lefty]

And below Powell's letter is Ms Rice's letter to Warner.

[dav4463]

How in the world can you put up a post that says "change the rules just for us?",,,,,,I would be willing to bet you would change your tune if one of those inhuman bastards was about to chop your head off while we watched on the internet. It's just like those anti-death penalty people. They are all for letting them live until their daughter gets raped and killed by some no-good murderer....then they are the first to want to send him to death.

[46zilzal]

And below Powell's letter is Ms Rice's letter to Warner.
kind of sleazy Rice has No mind of her own, but they want to change the rules: the administration proposal would avoid a key provision of the Geneva Convention that, in addition to banning torture and cruelty, prohibits "outrages upon personal dignity, in particular humiliating and degrading treatment." Through a complex legislative formulation, the White House proposal would redefine the requirements of the provision, known as Common Article 3.

[46zilzal]

Closely tied to the International Red Cross, the history of this humanitarian law has stood the test of time.
http://www.redcross.lv/en/conventions.htm

[Lefty]

46, GW is right and YOU and McCain are wrong. So Rice is sleazy but Powell is not? Rice backs the Pres Powell is weak and a backstabber to boot.
The Geneva convention does not cover terrorists. PERIOD. Go his way and we have a chance of winning. Be weak in this and the terrorists have and easier time of it.

[46zilzal]

I got the impression when Powell jumped camp, as I do now, that he did not want to associate with a group that had fundamental ideological differences from his outlook. Rice is a trained parrot with a tape recorder for a voice box. Yes Rutabaga, No rutabaga a perfect sycophant.

[Lefty]

I got the impression when Powell jumped camp, as I do now, that he did not want to associate with a group that had fundamental ideological differences from his outlook. Rice is a trained parrot with a tape recorder for a voice box. Yes Rutabaga, No rutabaga a perfect sycophant.
The people the Pres picks are SUPPOSED to be on his side. That's how it works. Powell left cause he's a backstabber. He Kept the Armtidge confession to him secret from the Pres and put the Pres and Rove through hell with all the speculation in the press and all the time, he Knew the truth of it.
If the Pres is a veg. then i may quit eating meat, he's doing such a great job. Not only keeping us safer and keeping the economy going he's giving you socialists "fits"

[46zilzal]

The rational person hires those with dissenting opinions in his ranks in order to get a complete overview of a situation. The rutabaga and his minions suffer from "Incestuous amplification" of ideas without ever considering options. Hints at being very brain dead....that is hardly a surprise from this group.

[GaryG]

As to the title of this thread....We don't need no stinkin' rules, we will do what we see as correct. After all WE ARE who we are. Hope to hell you stay in Canada by the way. :mad:

[46zilzal]

As to the title of this thread....We don't need no stinkin' rules, we will do what we see as correct. After all WE ARE who we are. Hope to hell you stay in Canada by the way.
I would have expected no less from another victim of incestuous amplification.

In a nutshell: Like-minded people, talking only with one another, usually end up believing a more extreme version of what they thought before they started to talk.
—Cass R. Sunstein, "The Power of Dissent," Los Angeles Times, September 17, 2003

[Lefty]

The rational person hires those with dissenting opinions in his ranks in order to get a complete overview of a situation. The rutabaga and his minions suffer from "Incestuous amplification" of ideas without ever considering options. Hints at being very brain dead....that is hardly a surprise from this group.
That's true. he dissenting person presents views and the Pres either accepts or rejects them. Once the decision is made the dissenter supposed to go along and be loyal to the man who gave him/her the job. Rice is supposed to speak for the Pres and his position when she speaks outsided of closed doors.
Powell the backstabber, chose to leave before he was asked to resign.
It takes a real rational person to keep the economy hunmming despite terrorist attacks, hurricanes and constant attacks from the left and the mainstream press. Whatta guy. Kudo Pres Bush!

[46zilzal]

Whatta guy. Kudo Pres Bush!
verbally dyslexic, amoral, and brain dead: what a combination

[boxcar]

I don't know why, these damn Senators and other opposers.........can't understand this simple point? Amazing............

This is simple to understand: The libs have expanded the definition of "uniforms" to civilian clothing, hoods and masks.

Boxcar

[boxcar]

I would have expected no less from another victim of incestuous amplification.

In a nutshell: Like-minded people, talking only with one another, usually end up believing a more extreme version of what they thought before they started to talk.

It still beats talking to unlike-minded loonies -- unless someone is relishing the idea of three hots and a cot in a Loony Ward.

Boxcar

[46zilzal]

ah yes pretend that ideas do not have rational alternatives. Odd coming from people who go to the races.

[boxcar]

ah yes pretend that ideas do not have rational alternatives. Odd coming from people who go to the races.

SOME ideas do, but certainly not all or even most.

Boxcar

[46zilzal]

SOME ideas do, but certainly not all or even most.


as a lifelong student of science, one never knows where the next "left field" idea will become dogma unless one is OPEN to the possibility of a new thought having merit. Just two: sister Keeny changed the way polio was treated, and another Australian discovered H. pylori and was thought nuts until proven correct (the major antacid pharmaceuticals i.e. Tagamet did not want to think they would lose all that revenue).

I remember hearing that the powers that be wanted to close the U.S. patent office in the 1890's because "everyone knew" that all the new ideas had been thought up.

[46zilzal]

can't ever forget old Sherlock Holmes: when you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth

[GaryG]

As PA once put it....this guy has his nose so far in the air he must be sniffing pure ozone. :lol: :lol: :lol:

[46zilzal]

attacking the messenger is usually a very weak tool but them why would I expect something unique?

[boxcar]

attacking the messenger is usually a very weak tool but them why would I expect something unique?

And just what "enlightening" bit of snake oil are you trying to sell us -- that all ideas have equal merit? Or that some "new" idea is always better than some old one? And that we should never be skeptical or critical of some idea that hasn't been tried and tested?

Boxcar

[GaryG]

attacking the messenger is usually a very weak tool but them why would I expect something unique?I'm sure you are used to it....You were the kid that used to get beat up every day at school, each time by someone else.

[kenwoodallpromos]

Closely tied to the International Red Cross, the history of this humanitarian law has stood the test of time.
http://www.redcross.lv/en/conventions.htm
___
The U.N. has since produced numerous human rights declarations, because they realize the Geneva Convention applies only to military in uniform.
That is taught to every military person in their boot camps- if you are caught fighting in any way out of uniform, it does not apply.
Anyone refering to the Genveva Convention for rules is wrong. Read the UN Human Rights stuff. The rules are there.

[46zilzal]

I'm sure you are used to it....You were the kid that used to get beat up every day at school, each time by someone else.
hardly....I never was into fighting....being much larger than everyone else helped.

Also NEVER being brought up in the RED NECK culture helped a great deal...

defined as : 1. Used as a term for a member of the white rural laboring class, especially in the southern United States.
2. A white person regarded as having a provincial, conservative, often bigoted attitude.

[46zilzal]

Colin Powell's memorandum.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/4999363/site/newsweek/

[46zilzal]

now the rutabaga is desperate.
http://www.cnn.com/2006/POLITICS/09/15/bush/index.html

[JustRalph]

Hey Pa............ this guy is getting pretty damn close to intolerable

I am getting sick of him calling people rednecks and telling us "how big he is"

I suggest that the others stop responding to him. He is just a troll.

[46zilzal]

I am getting sick of him calling people rednecks and telling us "how big he is"



that was a phsyical description only... a hint of why I stayed out of fights. A response to a remark about how a poster thought I used to get beat up everyday at school which is hogwash.

[46zilzal]

Hey Pa............ this guy is getting pretty damn close to intolerable


intolerable because I call the rutabaga the vegetable he is???

also Redneck culture is a place and an idea, not a person.

My family is from the SOUTH.

[46zilzal]

from the BBC:"The White House wants the new Guantanamo tribunals to maintain the right to use evidence obtained through coercion and to keep elements of prosecution cases secret from those accused.

But the senators argued that Mr Bush's proposals would effectively redefine the Geneva Conventions to allow harsh treatment of detainees held at the Guantanamo Bay camp in Cuba."

Too bad you aren't KING

Ralph Nader agreed as well.
http://www.commondreams.org/views04/0513-08.htm

[kenwoodallpromos]

from the BBC:"The White House wants the new Guantanamo tribunals to maintain the right to use evidence obtained through coercion and to keep elements of prosecution cases secret from those accused.

But the senators argued that Mr Bush's proposals would effectively redefine the Geneva Conventions to allow harsh treatment of detainees held at the Guantanamo Bay camp in Cuba."

Too bad you aren't KING

Ralph Nader agreed as well.
http://www.commondreams.org/views04/0513-08.htm
I voted for Nader but I think he knows the constitutionality of a war voted on by the Congress would have to be determined by the Supreme Court. I'm surprised Nader does not know that.
AG is what made me decide it was time to get out, but Congress keeps funding it.
Maybe if Pelosi becomes Speaker they will cut funding.
Or else they wiull keep looking stupid just calling Bush names of veggies!LOL!!

[46zilzal]

I voted for Nader but I think he knows the constitutionality of a war voted on by the Congress would have to be determined by the Supreme Court. I'm surprised Nader does not know that.
AG is what made me decide it was time to get out, but Congress keeps funding it.

there was no declaration of war

[46zilzal]

another one good for a laugh.
It's important to have members of the United States Senate who understand the call of history and are willing to stand strong in the face of an enemy who is relenting." (Aug. 31, 2006)


and this guy has a degree from Yale.....

[Tom]

kind of sleazy Rice has No mind of her own, but they want to change the rules: the administration proposal would avoid a key provision of the Geneva Convention that, in addition to banning torture and cruelty, prohibits "outrages upon personal dignity, in particular humiliating and degrading treatment." Through a complex legislative formulation, the White House proposal would redefine the requirements of the provision, known as Common Article 3.

And who should define the VAUGE CA3?
Look, 46, the GC doesn't apply to terrorists. If it did, why did YOU not show your outrage when THEY were beheading people?
Terorists hav eno rights to anything, most of all the right to life. Whatever we do to them to get info is 100% acceptable.

[Tom]

Hey Pa............ this guy is getting pretty damn close to intolerable

I am getting sick of him calling people rednecks and telling us "how big he is"

I suggest that the others stop responding to him. He is just a troll.

Time to slap the "big iggy" on him, Ralph!:lol:

[keilan]

hardly....I never was into fighting....being much larger than everyone else helped.

Also NEVER being brought up in the RED NECK culture helped a great deal...

defined as : 1. Used as a term for a member of the white rural laboring class, especially in the southern United States.
2. A white person regarded as having a provincial, conservative, often bigoted attitude.


HEHE -- Have you ever heard the term "Redneck Alberta" well that's where I 'm from and damn proud of it!!!! :jump:

[46zilzal]

yes, what a lifestyle to emulate.
http://www.catsprn.com/Rednecks.htm

[46zilzal]

back to the confrontation.
http://www.cnn.com/2006/POLITICS/09/15/toobin/index.html

[keilan]

yes, what a lifestyle to emulate.
http://www.catsprn.com/Rednecks.htm


46 between just you and me I have a set of moose antlers right over the front door :)

[Lefty]

ah yes pretend that ideas do not have rational alternatives. Odd coming from people who go to the races.
46, please tell us some rational alternatives instead of your usual hate rant.
What's the rational alternative to fanatics that have sworn to kill us(yes that includes you)unless we convert to Islam?

[PlanB]

Well Lefty, you might look hot in a burka. It's a tough call. (we gotta work
on your abs a bit)

[Lefty]

46, you manage to say less in more words than most anyone on this board. We are in a new kind of war, so new ideas have to be presented; as the old ones not appicable in the war on terrorism. Wasn't you who said something about alternatives? Now we are faced with having to come up with alternatives.

[Lefty]

Well Lefty, you might look hot in a burka. It's a tough call. (we gotta work
on your abs a bit)
You fall into the lib pattern of if you can't argue ideas just insult or make fun.

[Secretariat]

And who should define the VAUGE CA3?
Look, 46, the GC doesn't apply to terrorists. If it did, why did YOU not show your outrage when THEY were beheading people?
Terorists hav eno rights to anything, most of all the right to life. Whatever we do to them to get info is 100% acceptable.

How is one convicted of being a terrorist before interrogation? For example, are the national Taliban soldiers captured defending their nation terrorists, or are only members of al Queda in the round up in Afghanistan? Since the Taliban was the ruling party of a sovereign nation Afghanistan, would those arrested defending their nation be terrorists, or simply those defending their homeland and be entitled to provisions under the Geneva Convention? Likewise with Iraq. How does one determine an insurgent from a member of Al Queda, and if an insurgent is in the middle a national civil war does this person qualify for protections under the GC? Lots of questions here.

With no oversight it is difficult to determine what is torture and what is not, and information one obtains under coercion may very well be information to avoid pain, and not reliable information at all. It also means that this person is presumed guilty without benefit of trial.

I can understand the need for tough interrogation tactics, but I don't like the idea of us becoming them, and walking away from the GC. I am glad to see that integrity still exists in some Republicans who realize that such as Powell, McCain, Warner, Collins, and Graham. Hopefully, their message will get through.

[Lefty]

When we use rough interrogation tactics(loud music) it's a far cry from becoming them. And these "rough" tactics have yielded results. It's a war for our very existence, so I don't mid torturing the enemy with rock music. It's rough, jeez, it's bad.

[dav4463]

I would rather be a redneck than a follower of Islam bound and determined to chop off the heads of anyone who doesn't believe exactly what I believe.

[46zilzal]

I would rather be a redneck than a follower of Islam bound and determined to chop off the heads of anyone who doesn't believe exactly what I believe.
how about neither?..there are a myriad of choices out here.

[Tom]

46 between just you and me I have a set of moose antlers right over the front door :)

With a "5-pack" hanging off one of them?:lol:

[Tom]

How is one convicted of being a terrorist before interrogation? For example, are the national Taliban soldiers captured defending their nation terrorists, or are only members of al Queda in the round up in Afghanistan? Since the Taliban was the ruling party of a sovereign nation Afghanistan, would those arrested defending their nation be terrorists, or simply those defending their homeland and be entitled to provisions under the Geneva Convention?



It is ignorance like this that allows terroists to continue to grow!
The taliban the legitimate governemtn? Whea the hell are you smoking? There is no way in hell they were legitimate- they took over by force! The same wy SH was never, ever a legitmate government in Iraq. How can you have the gall to say the taliban was the legitimate rulers and WE are occuppiers when WE liberate them and help THEM elect a government?

[Tom]

I can understand the need for tough interrogation tactics, but I don't like the idea of us becoming them, and walking away from the GC. I am glad to see that integrity still exists in some Republicans who realize that such as Powell, McCain, Warner, Collins, and Graham. Hopefully, their message will get through.

And you will get your wish - Bush is going to drop the whole ting if he doesn't get the bills he needs. Do you know what this means?
ALL interrogations will cease. Nobody is willing to take on interogations wthout clear definaitions of what is allowed becasue they are afraid they will be prosecuted. We have already arrested soliders on jailed them with virtually no evidence against them, so why should the professional interogators tread in gray areas?

We have been able to stop plots for two main reasons - adequate interogations and wire tapping. You libs area taking away the only thing standing betweenus and the next big attack. The next 9-11 is on you.


Congress better be ready to come wtih a real solution fast, because Bush is dropping the ball in thier court - they are so high and mighty, it is now up to them.

So, Colin and McCain - two losers of the first degree - what do we do boys? Time to put up or shut up.

[PaceAdvantage]

how about neither?..there are a myriad of choices out here.

Yes, and respect of the choice of others should be a priority of yours....

You're a hypocrite. Fact, not flame.

[46zilzal]

Yes, and respect of the choice of others should be a priority of yours....

You're a hypocrite. Fact, not flame.
folks can be whatever they want.

You live by your rules. I live by mine: called choice.

[JPinMaryland]

We have been able to stop plots for two main reasons - adequate interogations and wire tapping. You libs area taking away the only thing standing betweenus and the next big attack. The next 9-11 is on you......


You left out cutting off stem cell research and a flag burning amendment.

[46zilzal]

Glad someone sees if for what it is.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/08/01/AR2006080101334.html

interesting phrase from same:"John D. Hutson, the Navy's top uniformed lawyer from 1997 to 2000, said the rules would evidently allow the government to tell a prisoner: "We know you're guilty. We can't tell you why, but there's a guy, we can't tell you who, who told us something. We can't tell you what, but you're guilty."

[Lefty]

You left out cutting off stem cell research and a flag burning amendment.
JP, been over this stem cell thing before gonna go through it one more friggin time. GW is the ONLY Pres to ever allocate a thin DIME to stemcell research and it has not been cut off but will mostly be done through private labs. So stop with the half-truths.

[Tom]

You left out cutting off stem cell research and a flag burning amendment.

What the hell does that have to do with the topic we are discussing?

[Tom]

Glad someone sees if for what it is.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/08/01/AR2006080101334.html

interesting phrase from same:"John D. Hutson, the Navy's top uniformed lawyer from 1997 to 2000, said the rules would evidently allow the government to tell a prisoner: "We know you're guilty. We can't tell you why, but there's a guy, we can't tell you who, who told us something. We can't tell you what, but you're guilty."

And this is new?
Guess what, it is used in law enforcment all the time.
Bottom line, if the guy knows something, we find out.

[JustRalph]

And this is new?
Guess what, it is used in law enforcment all the time.


Great point Tom! You can deceive and lie in interrogations........the Supreme court has been behind that for years. Detectives go to great lengths to pull off deceptions sometimes. And they are completely legit forms of interrogation.

[Secretariat]

It is ignorance like this that allows terroists to continue to grow!
The taliban the legitimate governemtn? Whea the hell are you smoking? There is no way in hell they were legitimate- they took over by force! The same wy SH was never, ever a legitmate government in Iraq. How can you have the gall to say the taliban was the legitimate rulers and WE are occuppiers when WE liberate them and help THEM elect a government?

We took over the 13 colonies by force. You may not beleive this but that's how a lot of countries work nowadays. Obviously, our government met with the Taliban as the rulers of Afghansitan, and our major oil companies even met with them about a pipleine across Afghanistan in Texas. Not sure whether GW had them down to Crawford for a hoedown or not. Donald Rumsfeld is seen shaking hands with Saddam Hussein and supplying him with weapons. We supplied Bin Laden with weapons.

My issue was about terrorism, and those defending their nation. If they are defending their nation in an invasion then they are soldiers under the protection of the GC. This goes to the heart of this. How does one seperate a Taliban national from an Al Queda member? Nowhere do I say I like the Taliban, and nowhere would I have liked the government of Stalin, or that of North Korea, but in the event of an invasion those soldiers fighting for those nations are entitled to protections under the GC. The issue here is "are members of the Taliban fighting to protect their nation from an aggressor the same as Al Queda terrorists?"

The issue is not whether the Taliban, an oppressive regime, is a legitimate government. Three of our allies had no problem recognizing the Yaliban government - Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, and the UAE, (GWs preferred US port security slave state.) They ruled Afghansitan from 1996-2001. Just because we don't like Castro and Cuba doesn't mean he hasn't ruled Cuba for 40+ years.

There are oppresive regimes, like the Taliban and North Korea. That doesn't mean they are exempt from the GC. The Supreme Court has weighed in as has the rest of he world, and now even some GOPers (Powell, Graham, McCain, Collins, etc.) are breaking ranks with GW as well as many in the military. Here's a few of them:

http://releases.usnewswire.com/GetRelease.asp?id=72524

[Tom]

Like I said, the next attack is on YOU.
You want US to play by the rules and give them a pass. Real good strategy.
You miss the Clinton years, with new attack, more Americans dead almost every year? Nostalgia for the gore?

[Secretariat]

Like I said, the next attack is on YOU.
You want US to play by the rules and give them a pass. Real good strategy.
You miss the Clinton years, with new attack, more Americans dead almost every year? Nostalgia for the gore?

Last I checked there are a lot more dead Americans in this President's watch then the last one. As to Gore, yes, I'd vote for him in a second.

[Tom]

Real cute answer.
I thought I would get something along those lines instead of a real reply.
Like a hobo party - nothing but cheap whine.

[Snag]

We took over the 13 colonies by force.

Sec, you may want to reread you history books. There were no colonies till we got here. We created the colonies.

[JPinMaryland]

He means the US created itself by force.

Come to think of it, most nations have been created by force but there are probably a few countries (maybe Canada?) that were not created by force..

[46zilzal]

Great point Tom! You can deceive and lie in interrogations........the Supreme court has been behind that for years. Detectives go to great lengths to pull off deceptions sometimes. And they are completely legit forms of interrogation.
spoken like a true COP

[46zilzal]

He means the US created itself by force.

Come to think of it, most nations have been created by force but there are probably a few countries (maybe Canada?) that were not created by force..
Canada was taken away from the native people, not always, but usually, by force.

[46zilzal]

http://www.cnn.com/2006/POLITICS/09/16/bush.un.expectations.ap/index.html

[Lefty]

http://www.cnn.com/2006/POLITICS/09/16/bush.un.expectations.ap/index.html

I guess the last line of the article is what you mean. I agree.
The UN is no friend of ours. Other Nations have their own agenda and few are friends. The UN is corrupt and impotent.

[46zilzal]

it's more like "I have a vision of the world....why I am the ONLY one who sees it that way?"

[Lefty]

it's more like "I have a vision of the world....why I am the ONLY one who sees it that way?"
He's not. Millions that elected him see it much the same way too. He's right and you people who live in OZ are wrong.

[PaceAdvantage]

spoken like a true COP

You totally hate authority, don't you? Would you classify yourself as an anarchist?

[Secretariat]

Sec, you may want to reread you history books. There were no colonies till we got here. We created the colonies.

Yeah, they were B-R-I-T-I-S-H colonies.

[46zilzal]

Incompetent, blanket authority expressed without regard to individual circumstances REQUIRES disrespect...The remainder of the time it should be held up to crtical scrutiny NEVER blind allegience to ANY authority.

[Tom]

You totally hate authority, don't you? Would you classify yourself as an anarchist?

Or a fugitive....he did flee to Canada! :lol:

[Tom]

Yeah, they were B-R-I-T-I-S-H colonies.

How come on this thread, you are pro-taliban, who enslaved woman, and in another one, anyone who enslaves boys are bad guys? :eek::kiss:

Do you really not see the difference between our founding fathers and the taliban?

[Show Me the Wire]

How come on this thread, you are pro-taliban, who enslaved woman, and in another one, anyone who enslaves boys are bad guys? :eek::kiss:

Do you really not see the difference between our founding fathers and the taliban?

Tom:

The post about slavery of camel jockeys was a subterfuge to bash President Bush implying the President condones the UAE rulers actions because of his association with the UAE Heads of State. Sec gives a rat's a** about the slavery issue, except for the opporunity to bash the leader of the Free World.

[JustRalph]

Duplicity Alert!!

Sec,,,,,,,,caught once again............

[PaceAdvantage]

Incompetent, blanket authority expressed without regard to individual circumstances REQUIRES disrespect...The remainder of the time it should be held up to crtical scrutiny NEVER blind allegience to ANY authority.

I never mentioned blind allegiance to anything....those are your words....

Sounds like you have issues....

[Tom]

Issues, or volumes?

I've never seen anyone who claims to be neutral get so worked up.:lol:

[46zilzal]

neutral on who wins the Iraq war NOT the rutabaga

[Snag]

46zilzal, being neutral isn't a position at all. It just means you have not formed an opinion.

I was told once that people are on one side of the fence or the other. If you try to straddle, you are only hurting your manhood.

[Lefty]

neutral on who wins the Iraq war NOT the rutabagaNeutral on who wins the Iraq war? That's a direct insult to America and that includes where you live, Canada. You don't care if the terrorists win? And you talk aboout Bush? You are the veggie.

[Tom]

Reminds me of the french vichy cowards - suc up to the nazis until we arrive, then suc up to us. Whoever is in charge is thier hero.
and with that, 46 just got promoted to "iggy."
I can't rad anymore of his vile, disgusting rhetoric, seeing as I view him as a friggin traitor and coward and terrorsit supporter, his very existence disturbs me. Waste of blood.

[46zilzal]

the rutabaga has everyone in "Yur wid us or aginn' us" mode and the world is just not that way. Even in court when the judge asks for your plea there are three options NOT two.

I find the rutabaga morally bankrupt and a silly fool thats all. ANY opportunity to make him look foolish (MOST of the time with his own words and actions) all one has to do is QUOTE him. Has nothing to do with Vichy although there is a pretty race track there today.

[Lefty]

the rutabaga has everyone in "Yur wid us or aginn' us" mode and the world is just not that way. Even in court when the judge asks for your plea there are three options NOT two.

I find the rutabaga morally bankrupt and a silly fool thats all. ANY opportunity to make him look foolish (MOST of the time with his own words and actions) all one has to do is QUOTE him. Has nothing to do with Vichy although there is a pretty race track there today.
The terrorists have sworn to kill everyone that doesn't convert to Islam.
Your only hope is for us to win. Wanna see a fool? Look in the mirror. I agree with Tom, you're a waste of time. Just a hater. How much energy and time do you waste hating?
Sometimes it is just that simple: In a war that threatens our very existence, you are either with us or against us.

[46zilzal]

Reminds me of the french vichy cowards - suc up to the nazis until we arrive, then suc up to us. Whoever is in charge is thier hero.

or neither which is a viable option overlooked by many.