SP's war on terrorism crash course
Posted By: B4 next interview. sm on 2008-09-11
In Reply to: She knew; she didn't know which part he was talking about... - sam
Unbelievable that someone who aspires to US VP displays such "kitchen table" understanding of the war on terror. Islamic terrorists do not attack the US because "they don't like" our democracy and freedom. Bin Laden was very clear on his reason for 911 attack/act of war in his letter to the US. Agree or not, in his view and that of his followers, these are his expressed reasons attacking US:
1. You attacked us.
2. You attacked us in Palestine.
3. The occupation of Palestine.
4. America's support of Israel.
5. The creation if Israel is a crime.
6. You believe the Jews have a Biblical right to Palestine.
7. His eye for eye perception of revenge for Palestine.
8. You attacked us in Somalia.
9. You supported Russians in Chechnya.
10. You supported India's aggression in Kashmir.
11. You attack us on a daily basis and war against Sharia law.
12. Governments of our countries act as your agents. They steal the Muslim community's wealth and sell it to you for paltry price. They support Israel.
13. Your military forces occupy our countries. They corrupt ouf lands and pillage our treasures.
14. You kill the children of Iraq.
15. You support the Jews in their efforts to establish capitol in Jerusalem. The would destroy Islam's most sacred Al-Aqsa Mosque.
16. Your oppression is aggressive.
17. You kill civilians and charge them with crimes they did not commit.
18. Your claims that American is the land of freedom are hypocrisy.
19. American people support US policies in Palestine.
20. American people's taxes fund planes that bomb Afghanistan.
21. Americans do not understand the language of manners and principles. They understand war, so we address them in these terms.
What are his demands?
1. We call you to know the meaning of Islam.
2. We call you to stop your oppression.
3. He goes on to list the ways America's government is not in compliance with Islam and with Sharia law.
4. Your law is the law of the rich and wealthy.
5. Your freedoms and democracy are for yourselves only and only for whites.
6. You do not respect international law.
7. You create a court for war criminals and then declare yourselves immune.
8. You torture at Guantanamo.
9. Abandon support for Israel.
Complete Discussion Below:  marks the location of current message within thread
The messages you are viewing
are archived/old.
To view latest messages and participate in discussions, select
the boards given in left menu
Other related messages found in our database
It's going to go a further way down, to crash status.
Got it on good authority.
Investors are not fools. It's only left-wingers who get it to up tick for a day or so, that's all. The rest of America ain't buying Obama's sudden "positive" attitude. They know it is a calculated and phony positive. Fools rush in, you know. Ain't nothing more foolish than a left-winger Obama worshiper.
1929 crash saw a loss of
The high point for us was last year at 14,164 in October and an 89% loss is 1,558.
It is hard for me to see where shoring up the banks is helping anybody. We are already down almost 50% from this time last year.
Well, Mcsame saw this crash coming and tried to avoid it...
unlike some others. That is one of the reasons I trust him.
Terrorism?
Terrorism? Me? Protests, you bet..American grew up on protests and I wil defend protests until the day I die..Terrorism, however, is a Bush creation..and Bush is the number one terrorist, IMHO..
War on terrorism.
We have been snubbed by other countries in our war on terrorism. The French turn their noises up at us, yet it was the United States who "butted in" and came to their aid....without which they would probably be speaking German instead of French. Terrorism isn't just a problem that the United States has to deal with. Every country is at risk of terrorist acts because we are infidels. Anyone who doesn't believe the way the terrorists do are infidels and should be put to death, according to them. So why are other countries to quick to judge us in our war on terrorism. Don't they realize that the terrorists could just as easily be blowing up their buildings and may move onto them in the future and then who will they ask to stand up with them......the United States of course.
It's like watching a horrible car crash in really slow motion.
No dupa - the shrub caused the crash and burn.......
Memory loss can signify medical issues which need to be attended to. Also, delusions can spell multiple significant issues which need to be addressed ASAP. Go with God.
Definition of terrorism.
Perhaps I can speak to this as someone who is both trained and educated in the subject.
The FBI, State Department, DHS, United Nations and numerous other agencies and experts have defined terrorism in somewhat different ways, but most definitions agree on some common elements with respect to terrorism:
1. Instilling fear...
2. ...in a civilian population...
3. ...by violence or threat of violence...
4. ...to advance social, political or religious objectives...
5. ...outside the context of lawful means of change or the conduct of war.
Although it is frequently said (usually in the popular press) that "one man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter", implying that the term is entirely subjective, this is only true when one of the "men" in question is intellectually dishonest. Terrorism has been defined with sufficient clarity that we can say with a high degree of specificity what is, and what is not, terrorism and who are, and who are not, terrorists.
When people seek to strike a moral equivalency between actions that are fundamentally terrorist and those that merely share certain common elements (for instance, both terrorists and nations at war use bombs), they are confusing superficial similarity with equivalency. This inevitably leads them into errors in thinking and the consequences of such errors - bad judgments, bad decisions, and wrong actions.
You might find a mouse in your cookie jar, but that doesn't make it a cookie.
Do you have a problem with fighting terrorism?
You only care that Bush possibly lied in regards to intelligence gathering. You seem to have no clue that good intelligence means you don't spout all your secrets to the American public and sometimes *gasp* to the congress. The congress does not specialize in intelligence gathering much less what to do with it once they have it. There are reasons there are different levels of access within the CIA and FBI. There is a need for covert operations. Read some John Grisham novels or better than fiction based on real events read some books about what the CIA actually does. You might be shocked to find out that they keep things top secret and may lie to people at times for the good of this country.
Economy 1st issue, Terrorism last sm
What is wrong with this country? What good will money do us when our country is attacked? There is nothing like one who has walked the walk to guide us. I am thinking of my family first, it won't matter how well off we are if we are not a "free" nation. McCain knows what evil is, he lived it.
Obama stance on terrorism....
This latest quote of his just says to me he doesn't get it, especially where Muslim extremists are concerned:
At a fundraising luncheon, he said he told Gilani "the only way we're going to be successful in the long term in defeating extremists ... is if we are giving people opportunities. If people have a chance for a better life, then they are not as likely to turn to the ideologies of violence and despair."
What kind of opportunities is he talking about giving them? And it does not matter what you give them...it is not about despair. I guess he did not see the poll done recently of Muslim students in London...way over half polled said it was okay to kill in the name of Islam, in fact it should be done; and way more than half thought Sharia law should be part of English law and supercede it in most cases. These Muslims are not in despair. Obama does not get it, he does not understand it, and that makes him plenty dangerous. Just like he says we cannot drill our way out of the energy crunch (and I disagree with that...might not drill our way out completely but certainly could take a bite out of our foreign oil dependance while working on those alternative forms of energy, which I do support...but there are no immediate answers there either)...we cannot talk Muslim "extremists" out of their extremism. And to think we can is naive at best and that is the nicest way I can put it.
Actually, even though Ayers' terrorism was that long
ago, he was quoted on 9/11/01 in the NYT as saying he feels "we didn't do enough."
See link below for the article.
Let bygones be bygones? NOT. He is only out free because of a legal technicality.
Christian Fundamentalist Terrorism
It's shocking to write. But it's time to start calling it what it is.
When Jim D. Adkisson walked into the Tennessee Valley Unitarian Universalist Church with 76 rounds and a shot-gun, he killed 2 people and was charged with murder. His motive was "he hated the liberal movement" and was upset with "liberals in general as well as gays." He should have been charged with terrorism.
Sunday George Tiller, a Wichita doctor, was killed INSIDE the lobby of his Wichita church. Reformation Lutheran Church became a crime scene; fundamentalist terrorism.
The right wing media hacks make targets of the left. The fundamentalist reverends blather their intolerance of other Americans. Their marriages are in jeopardy if the GLBT community can walk down an aisle. Their children are going to be molested if you have to rent to a same sex couple. Fear...fear...fear the queer.
Bill O'Reilly's hit piece on Dr. Tiller is a training tape for Christian Fundamentalist Terrorists. Never did he ask the woman interviewed how she, as a 13 year old, got pregnant, who was the father, or where her parents were when she underwent an abortion at Dr. Tiller's clinic. I'm sure O'Reilly's drivel will insist on personal accountability for the murderer. I'm sure he won't be in line for any "accountability" for calling the doctor "Tiller the baby-killer" or his clinic a "death mill."
Are anti-choice groups celebrating today? An abortion doctor is dead so women won't have unwanted pregnancies!
The "war on terror" needs to include domestic religious, fundamentalist terrorists.
The whole country would crash and burn. Do you know how many jobs in Michigan alone are auto related
Michigan might as well hang a sign on the door saying last one out, turn out the lights. But then if Obama has his way, we won't have any electricity either because the coal companies will be bankrupted too. Domino effect in my opinion.
Halliburton=Cheney=benefiting from war/terrorism
Check it out, lots and lots and lots written about it. Draw your own conclusions.
McCain has fogotten the stock market crash, mortgage/credit crisis,
unemployment rates, job losses, stagnant wages, rising prices in gas, food, health care, etc, etc, etc.
Senate Armed Services defies Bush; Passes its own terrorism tribunal bill.
Bush should be grateful for this (even though he will probably ignore it, as usual), as the day may come when HE faces charges as a war criminal, and he would demand and be entitled to the same due process under the law.
Senate Armed Services Committee defies Bush; Passes its own terrorism tribunal bill
09/14/2006 @ 3:41 pm
Filed by RAW STORY
The Senate Armed Services Committee defied President Bush today by passing its own terrorism tribunal bill to protect the rights of terror detainees.
Four of the 13 Republicans on the panel joined the 11 Democrats to pass their version of the measure, rejecting Bush's proposal to bar defendants from seeing classified evidence prosecutors may want to use in court, reports Bloomberg News.
The four Republicans acted against the White House today only a few hours after the president paid a rare visit to Capitol Hill in order to personally lobby House members to support his plan.
President Bush visited Capitol Hill Thursday where he conferred behind closed doors with House Republicans on legislation to give the government more power to spy on, imprison and interrogate terrorism suspects, reported the Associated Press earlier today.
Bush told reporters later at the White House that he would resist any bill that does not enable this program to go forward with legal clarity.
The bill passed by the Senate panel had been drafted by Republican Senators John McCain, Lindsey O. Graham, and Chairman John Warner. Senator Susan M. Collins was the fourth Republican to vote for the bill.
Voting 15-9, the Senate Armed Services Committee approved the bill they said would provide suspects more legal rights than Bush wanted and resisted his attempt to more narrowly define the Geneva Conventions' standards for humane treatment of prisoners, reports Reuters.
Earlier today, former Secretary of State Colin Powell wrote a letter to Republican Senator John McCain (video link), supporting his opposition to the president's plan which would redefine the legal definitions in Article 3 of the Geneva Convention.
The world is beginning to doubt the moral basis of our fight against terrorism, Powell wrote McCain. To redefine Common Article 3 would add to those doubts. Furthermore, it would put our own troops at risk.
REPUBLICANS
John Warner (Virginia) Chairman
John McCain (Arizona) James M. Inhofe (Oklahoma) Pat Roberts (Kansas) Jeff Sessions (Alabama) Susan M. Collins (Maine) John Ensign (Nevada) James M. Talent (Missouri) Saxby Chambliss (Georgia) Lindsey O. Graham (South Carolina) Elizabeth Dole (North Carolina) John Cornyn (Texas) John Thune (South Dakota)
DEMOCRATS
Carl Levin (Michigan) Ranking Member
Edward M. Kennedy (Massachusetts) Robert C. Byrd (West Virginia) Joseph I. Lieberman (Connecticut) Jack Reed (Rhode Island) Daniel K. Akaka (Hawaii) Bill Nelson (Florida) E. Benjamin Nelson (Nebraska) Mark Dayton (Minnesota) Evan Bayh (Indiana) Hillary Rodham Clinton (New York)
|
