 |
| |
|
|
Kuciwalker
|
 |
of Schmooism
Feb 2001
time: 00:35
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Spiffor
Pretty much in all security / foreign policy aspects + the radicalization of the internal debate. And that's only the things my French self can see, I bet any Yank can see much more in his surroundings. |
Where has the US government been "bigoted"?
quote:
Look at the war in Iraq. Bush had trouble selling it to the American people, and had to invent all these lies so that the Americans would agree to send their boys die on the other side of the planet. |
That has nothing to do with being bigoted.
quote:
Look at the "security" programmes like the neighborhood watches. It doesn't correspond to the terrorist threat at all, yet it was passed under the guise of fighting terrorism. |
Neighborhood watches have been around for decades. They're just supposed to cut down on crime. They have nothing to do with terrorism.
And again, it has nothing to do with being bigoted.
quote:
A great many freedom-reducing laws were passed under this false guise, to correspond with the conservative idea of a law and order society. |
Are you saying liberals don't support the rule of law? 
Seriously, though, I don't see any evidence of bigotry (I guess that's the correct word). Moreover, I think you're vastly overemphisizing the things that have happened.
(Plus, do you have any examples?)
quote:
Look at all the critics of the president have been villified as traitors favorable to the terrorists. |
By the Fez's of the world. So what? There are equally inane people on the other side of the fence.
quote:
It still continues to this day, when I read arguments like "If you vote for Kerry, AQ wins"  |
I'll assume you're really getting at the Spanish thing - do you really think that AQ didn't want the Socialists to win? In fact, there's nothing ridiculous about suggesting that AQ was trying to influence the election so that the Socialists won - it fits exactly with their goals. They want Western troops out of the Mideast. The Socialist candidate promised to pull out of Iraq. How much do you need?
quote:
And this phenomenon explains the spectacular lack of mainstream criticism against Bush until Dean pumped up the volume. Even today, you will still hear many people saying all Yanks should stick with the president in these times of war. |
Again, what does this have to do with bigotry? It's a common response in Americans - and it makes sense. Once you have committed to a course of action, staying with it is *generally* better than making an about-face.
quote:
And I suppose the Christian zealots of the Republican party have milked political profit from the current war against the infidels, by swaying more people to the idea that the US must show how devoutly christian it is. |
Did you notice the where it wasn't already before in my post? The attacks didn't suddenly make them bigots.
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
Wernazuma III
|
 |
Decolonize!
Aug 2000
time: 06:35
|
|
quote:
The admin argued that Iraq had WMD's, and thus was a threat - to my knowledge, there was never any direct connection made between those WMD's and AQ. |
The Bush admin tried to establish direct links between Saddam and AQ. It was said that he'd turn in his WMD over to Bin Laden. Of course, that was stupid and as such it has been understood over here, being called "the weakest part of the pro-war-arguments" but still, Bush used the emotional topic of 9/11 extensively in his justification of war.
Here's an old thread I posted on this, more than a year old, though Ming decided to close it for doing Cut and Paste from the NY-Times and the Independent. I'm still angry that Ming closed it, because other threads at that time which at the bottom just said: Discuss had not been closed  :
http://apolyton.net/forums/showthre...aeda+saddam+WMD
One more article from the Washington Post (not exactly a left wing nespaper IIRC:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/w...1¬Found=true
And just a quote for the lazy:
quote:
http://www.mediamonitors.net/davidagarrettjr1.html
On October 7, 2002 President Bush delivered a speech from Cincinnati, Ohio to the United States concerning the U.S. future role in Iraq. I have to admit that the speech was very moving with the much anticipated links between Iraq and al-Quaeda. However, the speech did not include any fresh information, nor did it provide any definitive answer to how we will disarm the Iraqi regime. It did play on the hearts of millions of Americans directly or indirectly linked to the attacks of September 11, 2001.
We have always known that Iraq has been planning to build nuclear weapons ever since the early 1990s. This speech has just been a summary of recycled information and does not have any breakthrough evidence against Iraqs plan for an attack against any nation, although Iraq is highly unpredictable when it comes to attacks. President Bush referred to September 11 five times in his speech, reinforcing the possibility of Iraq being involved with al-Quaeda. Bush also used words containing terror thirty-five times within his thirty minute speech. |
This was the propaganda of your fine prez back then. Play the emotional flute even with the most stupid melody to creat emotions strong enough to shout down any critics.
Just a private episode: My g/f, not exactly a political person and a great America fan (she went there as Au pair and had also been in the US at 9/11), wrote to a friend over there around Feb 2003 that she thought it was horrible what Bush was about to do in Iraq and she got the response that this was disrespect for the victims of the terrorist attacks and ever since that "friend" doesn't respond. I know, that's just a private episode, but emotions were high and in these emotions Iraq and Al Quaeda were one thing in the minds of many uninformed Americans and Bush made use of that.
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
CharlesBHoff
|
|
el paso texas
May 2002
time: 05:35
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by MichaeltheGreat
I'll enlighten those who don't already know it that you're one.
Enemy combatants who are actively resisting us are *******s, and get exactly what they deserve, but lawful combatant prisoners in our custody deserve treatment in strict compliace with the Geneva Convention and other applicable treaties and standards of treatment. Unlawful combatant prisoners deserve the minimum standard of treatment required under applicable law until their cases are disposed of according to the UCMJ.
Those guards, if proven guilty, should receive the maximum sentences for each offence convicted, and any senior NCO's and officers above them responsible for conditions at that facility should also be severely punished. |
You are total wrong on this you human right criminal you under arrest for human right assue and you arenot than human being anymore withg anby right all. We are assueing muslum prinsor in america inclueing the one who lead the fight against the evil secrect evidence law the Zionist force on the america government.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
CharlesBHoff
|
|
el paso texas
May 2002
time: 05:35
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Dissident
shocking
perhaps the U.S. military should be disbanded. |
My idear also disband the military, the FBI and CIA along with all federal law enforcement we would save 500 to 600 billion ayear on the federal budget.
The latest excuse they are now saying is I was okey order. The War Crime Trial after WWII clearly estra as legal principion that following order is no defense against war crime charge. YOU ARE SUPPOSE to DISOKEY JUST ORDER.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
CharlesBHoff
|
|
el paso texas
May 2002
time: 05:35
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by muxec
And seriously if those humiliated by US soldiers are terrorists US soldiers behaved almost right. The only wrong thing was a camera and US soldiers must be punished for filming, not for humiliating.
And why did US soldiers say that they did so? They'd better say that the photoes are fake and photoshoped. |
Only than criminal Zionist would say than dumb thing like this. Saying the photoes are fake wouldnot work beacuase I wouldnot believe any just thing.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
asleepathewheel
|
|
listening too long to one song
Mar 2002
time: 00:35
|
|
I'm not sure how this relates, but the current drudge headline with no link reads in huge bold print:
NYT: PHOTOS SHOW AMERICAN SOLDIERS HAVING SEX WITH ONE ANOTHER
?
stay tuned
edit: more, but not much new
quote:
Pentagon possesses three disks of photos, one of which includes some brief video clips. Many of the photos are redundant, and some have little to do with Iraqi detainees but show sex between U.S. soldiers... Pentagon officials prevailed at least temporarily in their insistence that the administration not immediately release the images, which include the forced masturbation of a detainee... |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
asleepathewheel
|
|
listening too long to one song
Mar 2002
time: 00:35
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by DinoDoc
Who cares if soldiers have sex with each other? |
Apparently Matt Drudge, the New York Times, whomever sent the tapes to whereever, and probably the pentagon.
And I would've thought getting laid would've killed some of the agression, but I guess there's plenty to go around.
|
|
| |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:35.
Apolyton Time is 00:35. |
top of page
|
| archivepost |
|
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|
10-05-2004 04:42
Attachment: 
This goes up to the Brigader-General rank. There isn't any scape goats here. They will be prosecuted. I mean come on.. don't be so stupid. The former soldiers in the photos will be the first to be prosecuted.
|
