|
Post by Robb Klaty on May 11, 2004 20:22:43 GMT -5
What has happend to the democratic party in the US?
In their quest for power they seem to be coming down on the anti-American side of things nearly every time.
Notice the response to the GI who abused Iraqi prisoners. Outrage at the leadership of this country.
Now notice how they respond the brutal killing of an American by terrorists... they blame the leadership of this country again.
THE DEMS IN THIER LUST FOR POWER HAVE THROWN OUT RATIONALITY. THEY WOULD RATHER BLAME BUSH FOR KILLING AMERICANS THAN THE TERRORISTS WHO ACTUALLY DO IT ON VIDEOTAPE! SICK.
Robb (who is outraged at the liberals and media in this country)
|
|
Kathy
Junior Member
my mugshot
Posts: 98
|
Post by Kathy on May 11, 2004 20:29:24 GMT -5
Robb, I was to chicken to say it like that but I agree. I would really like to hear what a demo has to say in response to your post. Do they really think that way? It's very scary. I happen to work right next door to the demo headquarters in my town and they seem like just your average citizen but I would be afraid to say that - I love my country and everything that it stands for - for fear of getting an earful about how I support killing of innocent people, which is so far fetched.
|
|
|
Post by no name on May 11, 2004 21:15:03 GMT -5
I love my country and everything that it stands for - for fear of getting an earful about how I support killing of innocent people, which is so far fetched. Oh, Kathy I know what you mean -- you should see the debate I'm having on this issue in the Israel thread! Robb -- there definitely appears to be an attempt to politicize this war on terror by many people in the Democrat party. Some of them are perhaps too blinded by their hatred for Bush and their desire for a return to power . . . to me, that definitely borders on being unpatriotic, and it does nothing to bolster the morale of our troops who put their lives on the line. Thank God for people like Joe Lieberman, Zel Miller, and other level headed Dems who realize this war for what it is -- and it's NOT a political issue. There are Democrats who support Bush on just this issue alone, because they realize the dangers we face (even though they may disagree with him on almost everything else). I don't mind having political differences with people, but I will not go without challenging things like ludicrous comparisons between Bush and Hitler, attempts to put U.S. actions on the same level as those of brutal tyrannical regimes. Then there's the favorite mantra from many on the left: "Bush lied!". Give me a break! Those kind of inflammatory and untrue comments really get my back up!
|
|
|
Post by inatent on May 11, 2004 22:59:46 GMT -5
I already sent you this by e-mail, but it seems it may be appropriate to post it here anyway. It was sent to me by my son. I don't know the original author. Date: Thu, 6 May 2004 20:06:18 EDT Subject: From a Veteran IF YOU EVER HAD ANY DOUBTS, THIS SHOULD CLEAR UP A FEW! FORMER GREEN BERET TACKLES KERRY Thank you, John Kerry, for helping make us Vietnam veterans war heroes now, but you also were the primary reason that the American public grabbed sturdy unbending brooms of judgment and swept us into the closet of silence and shame for so many years. Now, with your latest unreported insanity, you are getting ready for our society to grab those same stiff brooms and sweep our brave, noble young men and women fighting against the War on Terror in Iraq, Afghanistan, and elsewhere, into that cold, dark cell of heartbreak and betrayal, like we Vietnam veterans had to endure in silent dignity. I cannot and will not watch this country go through that again. The hard-core America-hating, Israel-hating, jihad-spouting Muslim clerics in the Mideast are very excited and passing around a front page newspaper story from the very anti-American TEHRAN TIMES in Iran. In the country that is home of the world's toughest theocratic dictatorship, an e-mail from Democratic Presidential nominee, you, John Forbes Kerry, sent to the paper by your campaign committee, although they deny sending it, was printed word-for-word on the front page of Iran's main newspaper. Your message states emphatically that, if elected President, you, John Kerry plan to, within 100 days, not only end the War on Terror, but travel to the Mideast and elsewhere and apologize for our actions and the actions of President Bush in the War on Terror. It says that you plan to apologize to friends and foes alike. That is right, folks. John Kerry will say he is sorry, and in his mind, all those jihad extremists, who have vowed to kill all Americans wherever we are, will simply forgive us, hold hands with Kerry, start singing "Kumbaya," and all will be right in the world. This is insane! Senior writer Kenneth R. Timmerman in the March 1st edition of INSIGHT, tells about the massive campaign contributions to the Kerry-for-President campaign by three Iranian businessmen living in the US, who are lobbying for the US lifting of sanctions on Iran and accepting the anti-Christian, anti-Jewish, anti-American Tehran regime and the close ties of one to the chairman of Mobil Oil. Pro-democracy dissidents in Iran are shocked and appalled at your remarks, and have reported that in Iran and other Mideastern countries, that all the extremists and anti-west mullahs who strongly supported the attacks on the World Trade Center, Pentagon, USS Cole, Marine Barracks, and anyplace Americans congregate, want you to become our President, but they are scared to death of George W. Bush. Just think, The Democratic candidate for President, you, John Forbes Kerry, is endorsed by the Al Q'Aida, Hezbollah, PLF, and Hamas. But on February 27, 2004, in a speech at UCLA , you, while trying to talk tough, despite voting against all major weapons systems for the past 18 years, stated that you will continue the War on Terror, but would use our police forces, and especially those in foreign countries, and you would also put our troops back under the powder blue flag of the United Nations. You recently made comments about Bush making troops fight without Kevlar vests,but you, Senator Kerry, voted against buying them while you were in the Senate. Like the Kama Sutra, Senator, you change positions constantly. You're not going to end the War on Terror, but instead use police to handcuff terrorists and read them their rights; then a week later, you are going to end the War on Terrorism and apologize to everyone we have offended, such as Iran. What is it going be next week, Kerry? You flip-flop more than a beached tuna on steroids. You convinced TV reporters Chris Wallace on Fox and NBC's Tim Russert that a photograph circulating the web and news showing you a few rows away from Jane Fonda at a September, 1970 Anti-War Rally at Valley Forge, was simply a coincidence and that you and Hanoi Jane barely knew each other. But, in fact, Senator, there were only 8 speakers that day, including Fonda, Donald Southerland, and Bella Abzug, and Hanoi Jane funded that rally, and the keynote speaker was you, John Forbes Kerry, executive committee member of Vietnam Veterans Against the War. We must be Americans first, and think about our political parties after that. Sometimes we lose sight of that. I have six grown children and two are democrats. I voted for Jimmy Carter. This is not about politics. It is about standing up to the ultimate playground bully, and not simply cowering and kissing his shoes. I left it "all on the field" in the jungles back there when I was med-evaced out of Vietnam in March of 1969 and sent back to hospitals in" The World." Although You, Mr. Kerry, painted all of us Vietnam veterans with the yellow brush of My Lai and Tiger Force, most of us, draftees and lifers alike, actually poured our hearts out in the tropical rain forests and in the rice paddies, thoroughly gave it our all, and acted as warriors who had honor. I have a son earning his green beret at Fort Bragg right now and a daughter-in-law on orders for Iraq. I am not going to stand by and watch them go through the same treatment we did, because some of our well-meaning fellow Americans choose to wear blinders and believe things just because they heard it on the network news or simply not care enough to get involved. I am not a "baby-killer, torturer, or murderer," John Kerry. I am a Vietnam veteran and an American who will not soon forget, or ever want to see again, any more jets loaded with fuel and screaming, innocent Americans slamming into our buildings on our very own soil. I have shed enough tears for ten lifetimes. We all have. I will never again let my fellow countrymen get away with making American veterans feel like bastard step-children. Santayana said, "Those who do not remember the past are condemned to repeat it." John Kerry, I now call on my "Band of Brothers," those who have heard the sound of guns and cries of orphaned children, those who hate war more than anyone who has not been there, to join me in this difficult battle ahead. Republicans, democrats, independents, and the apolitical, I call on the 25,000,000 veterans of this country to help me confront this evil facing our great nation, not with guns and bombs, but with our voices, our votes, our computers, and with all our fighting spirit. My fellow veterans, your families, survivors, and neighbors: God bless you and God bless America. You want proof of all I have to say. Here are the references: michnews.com/artman/publish/article_2889.shtmlwww.chronwatch.com/content/contentDisplay.asp?aid=6246www.iranvajahan.net/cgi-bin/news.pl?l=en&y=2004&m=03&d=01&a=12www.iranvajahan.net/cgi-bin/news.pl?l=en&y=2004&m=03&d=01&a=12>www.washingtontimes.com/op-ed/20040229-105340-2864r.htmjohnkerry.com/pressroom/speeches/spc_2004_0227.htmlnyyrc.blogspot.com/www.daneshjoo.org/article/publish/article_3130.shtmlWant more proof? Read the very exposing February 27, 2004 article, on page 8, of the NY Sun by Thomas Lipscomb, founder of Time Books and publisher of Admiral Elmo Zumwalt's best-selling book. "ON WATCH ". Also read what the man who pinned the Silver Star on John Kerry had to say about him. The article is entitled "Setting Straight Kerry's War Record " Don Bendell is a former green beret captain, who served in Vietnam on an A-Team and in the Top Secret Phoenix program in 1968 and 1969, as well as in three other Special Forces Groups. He is a best-selling author of 21 books, with over 1,500,000 copies of his books in print worldwide, and a seventh degree black master in four martial arts, who was inducted into the International Karate Hall of Fame in 1995 and Martial Arts Museum of America in 1996. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- inatent
|
|
|
Post by ha on May 12, 2004 5:12:09 GMT -5
I took the quote below from the first link of inatent:
I fully agree with Senator Kerry. For the moment it is Bush's actions which endanger american lives and american sovereignty. It is Americas actions which prove day by day that the US is indeed a paper tiger trying to prove the opposite. Terrorists will not continue killing if the US stops supporting Sharon and his tough policies against Palestinians, withdraw from Afganistan and Iraq, stop threatening with military action sovereign states (now it is Syria's turn) in their quest for the control of natural ressources (oil. uranium, minerals).
Ghandi once said «an eye for an eye makes the whole world blind».
And Solomon also said that «If you have been a fool by being proud or plotting evil, don't brag about it--cover your mouth with your hand in shame. As the beating of cream yields butter, and a blow to the nose causes bleeding, so anger causes quarrels»
|
|
inatent not logged in
Guest
|
Post by inatent not logged in on May 12, 2004 7:36:37 GMT -5
. . . . I fully agree with Senator Kerry. . . . . Just for clarification, exactly which John Kerry do you agree with? A main point of the letter is that he changes his position with the wind. There probably isn't anyone in the world who wouldn't agree with him . . . sometimes! inatent
|
|
Clinton covered up things
Guest
|
Post by Clinton covered up things on May 12, 2004 9:12:49 GMT -5
What has happend to the democratic party in the US? Now notice how they respond the brutal killing of an American by terrorists... they blame the leadership of this country again. Robb (who is outraged at the liberals and media in this country) Would it suit you more if it was done in secret? The CIA signed death certs. for many prisoners who "died in custody". Do you think they just died of old age? Who is responsible for the people who have been sent to Iraq? The title Commander and Chief must have some responsibility along with its authority. The leaders are responsible for the actions of those in their command. At least that was the reasoning when the US tried the leaders from past conflicts. The problems with the prisoners was known months ago. We have an administration that would like to hide things just like every other administration. Clinton tried to hide a blow-job. Bush tried to hide the fact that US troops under his command were torturing prisoners. People jumped all over Clinton. Tried to impeach him. You seem distressed that people are not supportive of Bush. Should they impeach him?
|
|
|
Post by Robb Klaty on May 12, 2004 9:28:38 GMT -5
Saddam and the terrorists are ultimatley responsable. Bush of course did send the troops in response. Bush is no more responsible for the actions of a few troops than he is for you are your wrong opinion.
Wrong. Bush has not tried to cover that fact up. He is just as outraged as everyone about the situation.
The difference is that people like you are not consistant in your outrage. Where is your outrage toward those who are daily murdering americans?
Like the rest of your dem friends (Zel and Joe notwithstanding), your outrage is misplaced and wrong.
Robb
|
|
|
Post by Confused on May 12, 2004 12:32:02 GMT -5
"Where is your outrage toward those who are daily murdering americans?"
Was this the topic of discussion?
|
|
|
Post by Just Here on May 12, 2004 12:48:44 GMT -5
Wrong. Bush has not tried to cover that fact up. He is just as outraged as everyone about the situation. Opps. Read the news. They did not want it leaked. no one would know if it had not been leaked from Iraq. They have known about this since January. Shouldn't he have been outraged then? It has been covered up. Even now there are 1,000+ photos that are being withheld. here
|
|
|
Post by Robb Klaty on May 12, 2004 13:03:21 GMT -5
Are you suggesting the President can somehow keep photos from the media? Give me a break, the media hates Bush too and is trying to get anything damaging out asap.
Still your outrage is misplaced. Sorry that you have fallen prey to the politization of the war by the dems and thier willing friends in the media.
It is sad that the terrorist have found allies in many democrats and media members. Thier hate has blinded them to reality, imo.
Robb
|
|
Kathy
Junior Member
my mugshot
Posts: 98
|
Post by Kathy on May 12, 2004 20:01:20 GMT -5
How do you compare the poor treatment of prisoners from American soldeirs to chopping someones head off for it? Don't you think the true terrorist are much more brutal? Why is that down played?
|
|
|
Post by voice of reason on May 13, 2004 13:01:15 GMT -5
Democrats are wanting to be rational, being totally American but at the same time have a listening ear to other nations thoughts, regard the rights of the God given environment and human beings in the world to the best of their abilities, working together to try and have peace....NOT gun slinging Christian fundamental terrorist.
|
|
|
Post by no name on May 13, 2004 13:30:34 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by Robb Klaty on May 13, 2004 16:52:14 GMT -5
Be careful, it is those Christian fundamentalists (I'll pretend that you didn't mean to say terrorist) who keep this country free so you can continue to spew your ignorance without fear of having your head removed.
Robb
|
|
|
Post by Just Here on May 14, 2004 10:41:42 GMT -5
How do you compare the poor treatment of prisoners from American soldeirs to chopping someones head off for it? Don't you think the true terrorist are much more brutal? Why is that down played? Brutality is brutality and it is subjective. Is it more brutal to kill a fly or a human? To pull the legs off a fly or a frog? To shoot a deer or the family dog. To kill a horse or a cow. To cut a civilian man's throat or drop tons of explosives onto a city where you are 100% certain that a civilian will be killed. To some rape may be a fate worse than death. To others dishonor is a fate worse than death. During WWII many Japanese killed themselves rather than accept the dishonor of not winning. Given the choice, I think I would like to keep my head and be photographed naked. It doesn't hurt me as much and the sight would certainly be painful to my captors! But that is just me.
|
|
|
Post by Just Here on May 14, 2004 11:01:09 GMT -5
Are you suggesting the President can somehow keep photos from the media? Give me a break, the media hates Bush too and is trying to get anything damaging out asap. I am not suggesting it - I am stating it as fact. As you noted, had the photos that the administration got in January been available the press would have been all over them like ducks on a June bug and they would have been published. Bush and the rest of them have tried to keep this covered up. They knew of the problems and it was only after someone else exposed the photos that they stepped forward. They are expressing outrage now but what about in January? February? March? April? Misplaced? Nope. I don't think so. It is right here and I can feel it getting more and more jumpy as I read more and more about the situation. Who do you think will take the fall for this? I am thinking it will do little to help out with the election. Well, I am not a democrat nor a member of the media. Because I do not think the current administration is a shining example of leadership does not mean I side with the terrorists. Who do you think they hate? A lack of respect is not the same as hate.
|
|
|
Post by Bertine Louise on May 14, 2004 16:06:10 GMT -5
I really don't understand why people are comparing the Iraqi prisoners to Nick Berg and ask what's worse... I don't think that question should be asked, it's both awful! You can't try to make the one thing less worse or better by comparing it to something else, i find that quite disrespectful. Besides, the worst of what happened in that prison has not been shown. And some prisoners did die as a result of their abuse.
Some say they rather have the place of an abused prisoner than losing their lives. Call me weak but I'm not so sure, I think there's a good chance that i would wish I'd rather be killed (preferably by a bullet tho!) than raped and abused, at least at the moment itself.
Marc Dutroux from Belgium - who locked up several young girls in a cage he built in his basement, stripped them, put a chain on their necks and raped and abused them- is on trial now. One of his victims Sabine Dardenne (12 at the time, now 20) testified and when she finally dared to look him in the eye she asked him:"Why didn't you just kill me at once?"
Just in case: I dont want to compare the American soldiers with Dutroux, but this just came into my mind when considering the choice between death and rape/severe abuse.
|
|
|
Post by no name on May 14, 2004 18:20:52 GMT -5
I am not suggesting it - I am stating it as fact. As you noted, had the photos that the administration got in January been available the press would have been all over them like ducks on a June bug and they would have been published. Bush and the rest of them have tried to keep this covered up. They knew of the problems and it was only after someone else exposed the photos that they stepped forward. It has been reported that the administration had not seen the photos until the public saw them. Additionally, the military had already been investigating the allegations of abuse for several months before now. The press was notified in January of this investigation -- the press didn't make a very big deal of it, b/c at the time there were no photos to display, so it wasn't a "sensational" story.
|
|
|
Post by Guest on May 14, 2004 22:06:33 GMT -5
We mustn't try to silence people who dissent from the current administration by name calling "anti-American".... dissent and discourse are part of what make this country great, and there's a whole lot of room for criticism when you look at what Bush has done, be it with Iraq, Cuba, Afghanistan, taxes, the environment, education, drugs, healthcare, corporate responsibility, and on it goes.
In Iraq, it's been one miscalculation after another, all very much predictable if you go back and read what the early dissenters (many leaders of our nation & the world) and the fact is that he's an ideologue rather than a Kerry type who at least is willing to change his mind when new information and new conditions dictate that it should be so.... who needs a stagnant policy which is steady... steady in the wrong direction?
|
|
|
Post by no name on May 14, 2004 22:37:24 GMT -5
Kerry . . . . who at least is willing to change his mind when new information and new conditions dictate that it should be so.... That's an interesting "spin" . . . ;D At least people are pretty sure where Bush stands on something . . . . I wonder if they can have such a feeling about Kerry . . .
|
|
|
Post by GuestAgain on May 14, 2004 23:08:59 GMT -5
Yes, that's for sure! Bush digs his heels in and doesn't move a millimeter, even when he's wrong. I know where he stands, and I wish he'd stand somewhere else. Doesn't a leader need to be someone who questions himself and his decisions periodically, seeking input from other sources besides a few closely held ideologues?
|
|
|
Post by inatent on May 14, 2004 23:50:12 GMT -5
. . . . a Kerry type who at least is willing to change his mind when new information and new conditions dictate that it should be so.... Interpretation: "new information" the latest polls or party line "new conditions" Speaking before a group with a different cause than the one last week. inatent
|
|
|
Post by FWIW on May 15, 2004 20:22:32 GMT -5
Quote:"It is sad that the terrorist have found allies in many democrats and media members. Thier hate has blinded them to reality, imo. Robb" Well, I am not a democrat nor a member of the media. Because I do not think the current administration is a shining example of leadership does not mean I side with the terrorists. Who do you think they hate? A lack of respect is not the same as hate. news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/afp/20040515/ts_alt_afp/us_iraq_vote_poll_040515180851
|
|
|
Post by Robb Klaty on May 15, 2004 22:45:14 GMT -5
Thats what they all say. Oh let me guess... an "Independent" right? ;D
|
|
|
Post by Guest on May 15, 2004 22:54:27 GMT -5
Defined another way "New Information": there were no weapons of MD. They lied to the public and to other nations. Support around the world is dwindling further, we are losing the moderates in the middle east. More people are becoming radicalized in the region, increasing the threat worldwide. Changes in strategy are needed.
|
|
|
Post by no name on May 15, 2004 23:03:37 GMT -5
Defined another way "New Information": there were no weapons of MD. They lied to the public and to other nations. Actually, the reality of the situation is quite a bit different from the favorite mantra of "NO WMDs", or "Bush lied!". Key points that David Kay made in his latest report about some things that were discovered: - A prison laboratory complex that may have been used for human testing of BW agents and "that Iraqi officials working to prepare the U.N. inspections were explicitly ordered not to declare to the U.N." Why was Saddam interested in testing biological-warfare agents on humans if he didn't have a biological-weapons program?
- "Reference strains" of a wide variety of biological-weapons agents were found beneath the sink in the home of a prominent Iraqi BW scientist. "We thought it was a big deal," a senior administration official said. "But it has been written off [by the press] as a sort of 'starter set.'"
- New research on BW-applicable agents, brucella and Congo-Crimean hemorrhagic fever, and continuing work on ricin and aflatoxin that were not declared to the United Nations.
- A line of unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs), or drones, "not fully declared at an undeclared production facility and an admission that they had tested one of their declared UAVs out to a range of 500 kilometers [311 miles], 350 kilometers [217 miles] beyond the permissible limit."
- "Continuing covert capability to manufacture fuel propellant useful only for prohibited Scud-variant missiles, a capability that was maintained at least until the end of 2001 and that cooperating Iraqi scientists have said they were told to conceal from the U.N."
- "Plans and advanced design work for new long-range missiles with ranges up to at least 1,000 kilometers [621 miles] - well beyond the 150-kilometer-range limit [93 miles] imposed by the U.N. Missiles of a 1,000-kilometer range would have allowed Iraq to threaten targets throughout the Middle East, including Ankara [Turkey], Cairo [Egypt] and Abu Dhabi [United Arab Emirates]."
- In addition, through interviews with Iraqi scientists, seized documents and other evidence, the ISG learned the Iraqi government had made "clandestine attempts between late 1999 and 2002 to obtain from North Korea technology related to 1,300-kilometer-range [807 miles] ballistic missiles - probably the No Dong - 300-kilometer-range [186 miles] antiship cruise missiles and other prohibited military equipment," Kay reported.
And yet, the main thing that got reported in the headlines (which can be very misleading) was “NO WMD STOCKPILES FOUND!” Just what kind of “stockpiles” were people expecting? Do people not realize that weapons such as Anthrax don’t take up that much room? Remember how much havoc the anthrax attacks on our country in 2001 wreaked on the U.S.? And yet no one has been able to successfully find or track down where it came from. With all the time that Saddam had to get rid of whatever he did have (and intelligence agencies besides the U.S. indicated that he did have such weapons – even the UN said this), is it really so far-fetched to realize that the materials could have been easily hidden and transported out of the country?? Below are links to some other articles that don’t get much airtime in the media (if at all). But if one is bound and determined to believe something like “Bush Lied!”, then I don’t know that anything will really change their mind, even if a mountain of Iraqi WMDs are found. Besides, Saddam alone was a WMD – mass graves being uncovered with anywhere from 300,000 to 1,000,000 bodies. I’m glad the man is out of power and that his people won’t be under his oppressive thumb any longer. Found: Saddam's WMDswww.frontpagemag.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=13168Iraqi Weapons in Syriawww.insightmag.com/main.cfm?include=detail&storyid=670123King Abdullah: Al-Qaida WMDs Came From Syriawww.newsmax.com/archives/ic/2004/4/17/141224.shtml
|
|
|
Post by The Democrat on May 16, 2004 9:08:56 GMT -5
No Name, I see you did a thorough search on that subject, and you came up with results which indeed can make you feel a little scared. What I can't understand is the fact that Bush refused to testify about WMD's before the commission he set up himself. Bush seems to be afraid to openly explain his politics. I think that he should be honest about the WMD's and focus on the liberation of the Iraqi people. He (or his intelligence services) made a mistake and he should correct it. Otherwise I can't see him as a responsible, integer man. Besides this, Kay even admitted personally that they couldn't find serious evidence of WMD, so I don't see why these cases can support your point. You can read more about it on CNN: <A HREF=" www.cnn.com/2004/LAW/02/20/findlaw.analysis.dean.wmd/">http://www.cnn.com/2004/LAW/02/20/findlaw.analysis.dean.wmd</A>
|
|