budullewraagh Posted October 8, 2004 Share Posted October 8, 2004 I don't agree with the socialist imperialism theory that you seem to hold as truth. woah hold up. where's the socialism? There is no Israeli terrorism sponsored by the state. look at their army. and dont even give me the bs that armies dont commit terrorist actions. example: holocaust, rape of nanking, 4 million casualties in vietnam war (many of which were civilians), chemical weaponry used in mass quantities in vietnam and world war 1, the firebombing of tokyo and the nuking of japan in world war two. the victors write history and choose not to degrade themselves. with regard to your history section, please cite sources They control the media, they control the money, and they control just about everything in palestine, there is no media and there is very little money. the money was stolen 4 years ago by the israeli army, which used anti-tank guns to break into palestinian bank vaults. they plundered, pillaged and left the computers with banking information destroyed. they recently did so again (see source in previous post). that is state sponsored terrorism. you are quick to blame palestinian groups for terrorist actions but you still do not address the issue of israeli state sponsored terrorist actions committed by their army. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drz Posted October 8, 2004 Share Posted October 8, 2004 No Doug, you are mistaken, once again. Let me break out the crayons and draw you a map. from the debate: I mentioned Halliburton a few minutes ago in connection with the $87 billion' date=' and you raised it in this question. This is relevant, because he was pushing for lifting sanctions when he was CEO of Halliburton. Here's why we didn't think Halliburton should have a no-bid contract.While he was CEO of Halliburton, they paid millions of dollars in fines for providing false information on their company, just like Enron and Ken Lay. They did business with Libya and Iran, two sworn enemies of the United States. They're now under investigation for having bribed foreign officials during that period of time. Not only that, they've gotten a $7.5 billion no-bid contract in Iraq, and instead of part of their money being withheld, which is the way it's normally done, because they're under investigation, they've continued to get their money. [/quote'] and Cheney's response: Well, the reason they keep mentioning Halliburton is because they're trying to throw up a smokescreen. They know the charges are false.They know that if you go, for example, to factcheck.com, an independent Web site sponsored by the University of Pennsylvania, you can get the specific details with respect to Halliburton. It's an effort that they've made repeatedly to try to confuse the voters and to raise questions, but there's no substance to the charges. In the bolded section, Cheney basically says that factcheck.org refutes Edwards accusations. But FactCheck.org themselves say that Edwards was mostly right. He was wrong about Libya, and wrong about something else, but the specifics can be found at http://www.factcheck.org, I suggest you check it out. But the simple fact of the matter, this has nothing to do with Cheney slipping up and saying factcheck.com instead of org. Nothing at all. This has to do with him saying there is information at factcheck.org that supports his claim, when there is none. If this is not a lie, I don't know what is. I also notice your not mentioning anything about Cheney's lie about the debate being he and Edwards first meeting together. Face it, dude lied, as this administration is famous for having done. Bush lied about why we were going to war (imminent threat to national security.) all debate excerpts taken from http://www.cnn.com/2004/ALLPOLITICS/10/05/debate.transcript2/index.html Its funny, but Foxnews.com doesn't seem to have the transcript anymore??? I don't think anyone, anywhere, has suggested Cheney's slip up about the web address a lie. Certainly not in this thread, nor forum. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
john5746 Posted October 8, 2004 Share Posted October 8, 2004 To me the one time Cheney either lied or had a "senior" moment, was when he said he never suggested a link between Saddam and 9/11. Each side throws things at the other that are misleading, etc. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pangloss Posted October 8, 2004 Share Posted October 8, 2004 I have to agree, having watched it and reviewed various articles on the subject, Cheney has definitely suggested in the past that there was a connection between Saddam and 9/11. He doesn't say it directly, he just implies the hell out of it -- synonymous with "suggesting". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Luminol Posted October 8, 2004 Share Posted October 8, 2004 woah hold up. where's the socialism? look at their army. and dont even give me the bs that armies dont commit terrorist actions. example: holocaust' date=' rape of nanking, 4 million casualties in vietnam war (many of which were civilians), chemical weaponry used in mass quantities in vietnam and world war 1, the firebombing of tokyo and the nuking of japan in world war two. the victors write history and choose not to degrade themselves. with regard to your history section, please cite sources in palestine, there is no media and there is very little money. the money was stolen 4 years ago by the israeli army, which used anti-tank guns to break into palestinian bank vaults. they plundered, pillaged and left the computers with banking information destroyed. they recently did so again (see source in previous post). that is state sponsored terrorism. you are quick to blame palestinian groups for terrorist actions but you still do not address the issue of israeli state sponsored terrorist actions committed by their army.[/quote'] My source for the history section is a book called the Forgotten Ally written in 1943 by Pierre Van Paassen...you have to get it in the out of print section of Amazon or B&N (it was recommended to me by Walid Shoebat who was a former Palistinian terrorist...try e-mailing him I'm sure he would love to give you more specifics of his story and his view about what is going on), Walid Shoebats website...http://www.walidshoebat.com (I recommend watching the video there that I posted here a few posts back called A Palistinians Journey under the media section). I also recomend reading the "Arabs who speak out" section and listening to Dr. Tarek Abdelhamid (yes he is on Israeli radio) who is an Egyptian Psychologist (I think) who created his own form of peaceful Islam... at first he to joined a terrorist group when he was younger and prayed with Al Qadia's #2 man. He then changed his mind...and formed a new sect of Islam that believes the Jews have a right to their land. These people were there and were involved and are very interesting to listen to...they give a good look into the mind set over there. Another source was the UNs website on Israel, and I think I used Tea with Terrorists written by Craig Winn who went to Palistine and interviewed terrorists from the PLO, Al Qadia, HAMAS, and Islamic Jihad. The book is written as fiction but the section called Tea With Terrorists is almost exactly word for word what was said. The funny thing is that the PLO terrorists are afraid of HAMAS and Islamic Jihad...they think they are crazy. I'm sorry but I don't see taking money used to fund killing Jews as a terrorist act. Israels army is there for defense...if they had it for offense then why would they give the land back that they won in the wars that they fought. The Jews were going to give Palistine land...what they wanted. Sharon even went against his own party to do this and what happened? Terrorist attacks against the Jews. After the Oslo accords with Clinton what happened? The most violent year of suicude bombings in the history of Israel. I hope that clears up this state sponsored terrorism thing. I don't see what you are describing as terrorism...as terrorism (including some of the hisotrical non middle east stuff you listed). I guess we will have to disagree on that. Palistine does have a state controlled media... I posted the link a few posts back. http://www.pmw.org.il/ (yes its an Israeli website)...and there are other middle eastern media outlets which can be seen translated here: http://www.memri.org/index.html Anyway...take a look at the sources I've posted here and tell me what you think. Oh and one more thing...your source for the bank heist thing is Baku Today from Azerbaiijan (a 98% Muslim country)...It says the Israelis used tear gas and rubber bullets against palistinians. They raided banks that were supporting Hezbollah, HAMAS, and Islamic Jihad...three terrorists groups that aren't even from Palistine...but are still there killing Jews. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Luminol Posted October 8, 2004 Share Posted October 8, 2004 I forgot this site too. http://www.freemuslims.org/ A good one. I don't agree with a few things they say...but at least they don't support terrorism. and here is an article about Walid Shoebat from the BBC http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/pr/fr/-/2/hi/middle_east/3430077.stm Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
atinymonkey Posted October 8, 2004 Share Posted October 8, 2004 The left wing liberal mindset is............ Almost everything a republican (or Bush) says is a LIE........... Anyone who can construe the above quotes as a lie' date=' needs to be blessed. Responsible repubicans don't call Kerry a liar. They call him a flip flopper. Even a flip flopper is not a liar, it's just a person who changes his tune as a function of which way the political winds are blowing.[/quote'] Doug, if George Bush Jr himself stood on the porch of the Whitehouse and personnaly announced that he lied to the American public, you would deny that with handwaving as left wing liberal lies. Keep in mind that us none Americans don't actually have any vested interest in the outcome of the elections, we are trying to cut through the propaganda you are being spoon-fed and present the facts to you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Douglas Posted October 8, 2004 Share Posted October 8, 2004 drz.......They know that if you go, for example, to factcheck.com, an independent Web site sponsored by the University of Pennsylvania, you can get the specific details with respect to Halliburton. Cheney did *not* say that Factcheck refutes Edwards' statement. He merely said "you can get the specific details with respect to Halliburton." He may have been referring to this.......http://factcheck.org/archive.aspx.html scroll down. drz.........I also notice your not mentioning anything about Cheney's lie about the debate being he and Edwards first meeting together. There are over 500 members of Congress, Edwards was reletively unknown. Chaney may have forgot. drz........I don't think anyone, anywhere, has suggested Cheney's slip up about the web address a lie. Certainly not in this thread, nor forum. Re-read this thread, it was said twice. Face it, dude lied, as this administration is famous for having done. Bush lied about why we were going to war (imminent threat to national security.) No, you face it dude, If the above was TRUE, Bush would have been impeached a year ago. Once again, try not to throw the words "lie/liar" around so loosely. I noticed that Terry Mcauliff said it yesterday.....and in my opinion, making a fool of himself. There are only a couple of members of congress who have called Bush a liar, the remainder, both rebub and Dems are responsible people. Now, go back to "moveon.org and dig up some more lies. http://factcheck.org/archive.aspx.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Douglas Posted October 8, 2004 Share Posted October 8, 2004 Doug' date=' if George Bush Jr himself stood on the porch of the Whitehouse and personnaly announced that he lied to the American public, you would deny that with handwaving as left wing liberal lies. Keep in mind that us none Americans don't actually have any vested interest in the outcome of the elections, we are trying to cut through the propaganda you are being spoon-fed and present the facts to you.[/quote'] 1st paragraph..............nonsense. 2nd paragraph........I would think that the UK would be VERY interested in the outcome of this election. Who's spoon feeding whom? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sayonara Posted October 8, 2004 Share Posted October 8, 2004 2nd paragraph........I would think that the UK would be VERY interested in the outcome of this election. In the soap opera sense, yes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LucidDreamer Posted October 8, 2004 Share Posted October 8, 2004 In the soap opera sense, yes. Yet none of the characters come back to life in another season in this soap opera. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lance Posted October 8, 2004 Author Share Posted October 8, 2004 Yet none of the characters come back to life in another season in this soap opera. Not to mention the massive impact on the entire world. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sayonara Posted October 8, 2004 Share Posted October 8, 2004 Not to mention the massive impact on the entire world. Wel you say that, but America's foreign and economic policies haven't changed that significantly over the years as far as most countries are concerned. Maybe you need to bring in some new characters, or have it turn out that a celebrated couple are directly related. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Douglas Posted October 8, 2004 Share Posted October 8, 2004 In the soap opera sense, yes. Good one Sayonara....I like that. (chuckling) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sayonara Posted October 8, 2004 Share Posted October 8, 2004 It's funny because it's true Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LucidDreamer Posted October 8, 2004 Share Posted October 8, 2004 You Brits are fickle fans. We vilified the leader of an Arab country (admittedly he was already a villian) and claimed he had weapons of mass destruction. Then we went in and kicked butt and captured him. Now he is eating cookies and writing poetry in U.S. custody. Isn't that enough to interest you? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sayonara Posted October 8, 2004 Share Posted October 8, 2004 We're not really fickle - about 70% of us opposed that particular story line. The writers were told not to listen by the production assistant though. When he escapes his prison and embarks on a perilous journey through enemy territory in the nail-biting season finalé ratings will probably pick up a bit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drz Posted October 8, 2004 Share Posted October 8, 2004 funny, I've never been to moveon.whatever Most of what I noticed has been from reading the debate transcript, and factcheck.org's comments. hehe, politics suck. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Douglas Posted October 8, 2004 Share Posted October 8, 2004 funny' date=' I've never been to moveon.whatever Most of what I noticed has been from reading the debate transcript, and factcheck.org's comments. hehe, politics suck.[/quote'] Good, stay away from "moveon" and "axisoflogic" You're reading the right material. I agree............."politics suck" I guess sucky politics are better than NO politics............errrr.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pangloss Posted October 8, 2004 Share Posted October 8, 2004 More objective/centrist/moderate/non-partisan sites to watch: Spinsanity Centrist Policy Network Organization of News Ombudsmen Center for Media and Public Affairs Media Notes with Howard Kurtz (Washington Post media analyst) Editor & Publisher Magazine On the Issues (huge database of candidate voting records) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drz Posted October 9, 2004 Share Posted October 9, 2004 wait a minute doug. So now you agree with me? I'm confused??? I still stand by cheney lieing. I've yet to see anyone show anything that demonstrates differently. and no, I think politics suck not because of what they are, but because of the way people blindly decide to follow one group, and relentlessly defend them, even contrary to the evidence. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Douglas Posted October 9, 2004 Share Posted October 9, 2004 wait a minute doug. So now you agree with me? I'm confused??? I still stand by cheney lieing. I've yet to see anyone show anything that demonstrates differently. and no' date=' I think politics suck not because of what they are, but because of the way people blindly decide to follow one group, and relentlessly defend them, even contrary to the evidence.[/quote'] Hey drz, I'm chuckling "people blindly decide to follow one group, and relentlessly defend them, even contrary to the evidence" NOW, would that be you?, OR would that be me? OR would that be the both of us? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drz Posted October 9, 2004 Share Posted October 9, 2004 well, my group is the group that will not forgive the current administration for taking us to war based on lies, mistruths, mistakes whatever you want to call them. And I've provided evidence, whereas you have not. 1+1=2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Douglas Posted October 9, 2004 Share Posted October 9, 2004 well' date=' my group is the group that will not forgive the current administration for taking us to war based on lies, mistruths, mistakes whatever you want to call them. And I've provided evidence, whereas you have not. 1+1=2[/quote'] Whoa, whoa, whoa, Bush didn't lie, Remember? He'd be impeached by now. He got his info from the British intellegence.....No? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drz Posted October 9, 2004 Share Posted October 9, 2004 reread what you just quoted. "lies, mistruths, mistakes" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now