^ GG.

True, true. Thanks for being one of the few sane voices around here, Excoriator.

11/24/2005 11:15:52 AM

Quote :

"I think every culture should be respected and honored "

every culture? i think not.

[Edited on November 24, 2005 at 11:22 AM. Reason : -]

11/24/2005 11:22:15 AM

1) We eliminated a national security threat

How'd we do that, when Saddam had no WMDs, there were inspectors on the ground, and had he was completely contained?

Quote :

"2) We aided in ending some terrorism in the region"

Quote :

"U.S. Figures Show Sharp Global Rise In Terrorism State Dept. Will Not Put Data in Report By Susan B. Glasser Washington Post Staff Writer Wednesday, April 27, 2005; Page A01 The number of serious international terrorist incidents more than tripled last year, according to U.S. government figures, a sharp upswing in deadly attacks that the State Department has decided not to make public in its annual report on terrorism due to Congress this week. Terrorist incidents in Iraq also dramatically increased, from 22 attacks to 198, or nine times the previous year's total -- a sensitive subset of the tally, given the Bush administration's assertion that the situation there had stabilized significantly after the U.S. handover of political authority to an interim Iraqi government last summer"

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/04/26/AR2005042601623.html

Quote :

"3) We will have a new ally 4) Iraq will be able to rule and govern itself"

Iraq is going to splinter, whether we're there or not, into 3 different countries. [Unless we make Ahmed Chalabi the next Saddam]

If it doesn't split into 3 countries, it'll be an Islamic nation like Iran. [Unless we make Ahmed Chalabi the next Saddam]

How many Islamic nations are our ally?


[Edited on November 24, 2005 at 11:25 AM. Reason : addd]

11/24/2005 11:23:42 AM

From your own article:

Quote :

"The administration aides sought to explain the rise in attacks as the result of more inclusive methodology in counting incidents, which they argued made year-to-year comparisons "increasingly problematic," sources said."

Quote :

"Under the standards used by the government, "significant" terrorist attacks are defined as those that cause civilian casualties or fatalities or substantial damage to property. Attacks on uniformed military personnel such as the large number of U.S. troops stationed in Iraq are not included. The data provided to the congressional aides also showed terrorist attacks doubling over the previous year in Afghanistan, to 27 significant incidents, and in Israel, Gaza and the West Bank, where attacks rose to about 45, from 19 the year before. Also occurring last year were such deadly attacks as the seizure of a school in Beslan, Russia, by Chechen militants that resulted in at least 330 dead, and the Madrid train bombings that left nearly 200 dead. "

Hmm, what could be going on in the West Bank? Or Chechnya? Or Afghanistan?

11/24/2005 11:34:19 AM

So you believe our military presence in Iraq is quelling terrorism, and not inflaming it?

11/24/2005 11:39:45 AM

We are concentrating the terrorist acts, making it easier to defeat.

Not that I'd expect you to understand that extremely simple military tactic - the best way to defeat an enemy is to force them to fight you on your terms.

11/24/2005 11:42:01 AM

Britain has had such great success fighting them "over there", haven't they?

11/24/2005 11:43:12 AM

No, that just goes to show what happens when you allow anybody to enter your borders. They're changing their laws to prevent another incident, just like the United States did after 9/11.

11/24/2005 11:44:53 AM

Except that we're not guarding our borders.

11/24/2005 11:48:18 AM

I meant legally enter, duh.

What should be done about the borders, pryderi?

11/24/2005 11:50:38 AM

I liked this plan:

Quote :

"Track and Stop Terrorists The war on terror requires good intelligence, yet many of the problems with information-sharing and databases that allowed terrorists to slip into our country before 9/11 have not been addressed. As part of a reform of our intelligence services, John Kerry will establish a true Director of National Intelligence to coordinate the nation's intelligence efforts, and he will establish a separate service within the Federal Bureau of Investigation dedicated to intelligence work. He will accelerate the improvement and integration of key watchlists and databases so they operate quickly and seamlessly. And he will give more security clearances to state and local officials and ensure that they get critical information quickly when they need it. Protect our Borders and Shores At our ports, the Kerry-Edwards plan will improve loading facility security while improving the accuracy and timing of transmitted and shared data about contents, location, and chain of control regarding a container shipment. At our airports, the Kerry-Edwards plan will ensure adequate security for air cargo, tons of which goes uninspected today, and ensure that screenings at airports continue to become more effective. At our borders, the Kerry-Edwards plan will use technology and work with Canada and Mexico to improve border security while speeding up legal and secure passages across our border. Harden Vulnerable Targets We must do more to reduce risks at likely targets of terrorist attack, including nuclear plants and chemical plants. For example, even though an attack on a chemical plant could endanger 1 million Americans, the current administration has failed to require better security at chemical plants because of lobbying from the chemical industry. The Kerry-Edwards plan will require these plants to adopt adequate plans to improve security, including measures to reduce dangers to the public if an attack occurs. It will also improve security at nuclear plants and strengthen security on railways and subways by more chemical and biological detectors and taking other key steps to prevent terrorists from striking our trains. Improve Domestic Readiness Our first defenders will respond to any attack with courage and heroism-but they also need the equipment and manpower to do the job. The Kerry-Edwards plan will provide direct assistance to our police officers and firefighters to ensure that they have the communications systems, protective gear, and manpower they need to protect our communities. It will also modernize our emergency warning system to provide localized warnings, treat the fighters on the frontlines as partners, and provide all Americans with the information they need. To improve our ability to respond to a biological attack, John Kerry will put one individual in charge of our anti-bioterror efforts, set national benchmarks for state and local preparedness, and harness America's bioscience genius to increase drug and vaccine development. Finally, John Kerry will enable all Americans to do their part by creating a new community defense service comprised of ordinary Americans that serves as a 21st century neighborhood watch. And he will expand national service opportunities for young people who want to help defend our nation."

[Edited on November 24, 2005 at 11:58 AM. Reason : ]

11/24/2005 11:57:33 AM

Quote :

"While we're at it, woodfoot, would you like to laud the southern baptists, fred phelps, and neo-nazi cultures?"

i don't see where i "laud" anything

and i'll be the first one to criticize the southern baptists

since i've been one for like 15 years now

thats the beauty though
i can criticize my church all the live long day
and my pastor isn't going to SAW MY FUCKING HEAD OFF

11/24/2005 12:11:29 PM

Quote :

" 1) We eliminated a national security threat 2) We aided in ending some terrorism in the region 3) We will have a new ally 4) Iraq will be able to rule and govern itself"

Care to cite some sources for these claims?

11/24/2005 12:59:27 PM

http://www.cia.gov/cia/reports/iraq_wmd_2004/transmittal.html

Quote :

"From the evidence available through the actions and statements of a range of Iraqis, it seems clear that the guiding theme for WMD was to sustain the intellectual capacity achieved over so many years at such a great cost and to be in a position to produce again with as short a lead time as possible—within the vital constraint that no action should threaten the prime objective of ending international sanctions and constraints. Saddam continued to see the utility of WMD. He explained that he purposely gave an ambiguous impression about possession as a deterrent to Iran. He gave explicit direction to maintain the intellectual capabilities. As UN sanctions eroded there was a concomitant expansion of activities that could support full WMD reactivation. He directed that ballistic missile work continue that would support long-range missile development. Virtually no senior Iraq believed that Saddam had forsaken WMD forever. Evidence suggests that, as resources became available and the constraints of sanctions decayed, there was a direct expansion of activity that would have the effect of supporting future WMD reconstitution."

^That makes Hussein sound like a significant threat.

Quote :

"“President Saddam Hussein has recently told the head of the Palestinian political office, Faroq al-Kaddoumi, his decision to raise the sum granted to each family of the martyrs of the Palestinian uprising to $25,000 instead of $10,000,” Aziz, announced at a Baghdad meeting of Arab politicians and businessmen on March 11, 2002"

Quote :

""We are glad of the Istishhadiyyah [suicide] and heroic spirit of the Palestinian people. By Allah, what the Palestinian people does is beyond my expectations." - Iraqi deputy prime minister Tariq Aziz"

Sounds like Hussein was funding terrorism in Israel.

11/24/2005 1:22:26 PM

explain to me again how protecting israel protects me

11/24/2005 4:13:17 PM

Jesus was born there?

and Jesus was an American

we have to protect our own

11/24/2005 4:25:48 PM

Quote :

"He explained that he purposely gave an ambiguous impression about possession as a deterrent to Iran."

and that makes him a threat to us how?

11/24/2005 4:30:11 PM

Quote :

"Results of ISG’s Investigation on Nuclear Issues Iraq did not possess a nuclear device, nor had it tried to reconstitute a capability to produce nuclear weapons after 1991. ISG has uncovered no information to support allegations of Iraqi pursuit of uranium from abroad in the post-Operation Desert Storm era. * In the late 1970s and early 1980s, Iraq had an aggressive program to acquire uranium. Iraq’s known inventory of safeguarded uranium has been accounted for by the IAEA and Coalition in June 2004. These issues are described in detail in the uranium pursuits section of this paper. Iraq did not reconstitute its indigenous ability to produce yellowcake. As a result of Desert Storm and IAEA inspection efforts, Iraq’s indigenous yellowcake production capability appears to have been eliminated. Bomb damage in 1991 destroyed the uranium extraction facility at the Al Qaim Superphosphate Fertilizer Plant. During the years of intrusive inspections, the IAEA also closed and sealed the Abu Skhair mine to curtail Iraq’s secondary pilot plant production capability for acquiring uranium. "

http://www.cia.gov/cia/reports/iraq_wmd_2004/chap4.html#sect1

This report re-affirms what Joe Wilson said in his, "What I didn't Find in Africa" piece.

Quote :

"The Senate judiciary committee heard from a senior official that the Bush administration had doubts over Saudi Arabia's claims to have closed a government account that funded militant Palestinian groups, and was concerned about the overseas activities of Saudi charities and non-governmental organisations with close ties to the royal family."

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/9971686/

Also, 15 of the 19 hijackers of the 9-11 attacks were Saudis. 0 Iraqis.

That makes Saudi Arabia sound like a significant threat.



[Edited on November 24, 2005 at 4:33 PM. Reason : ]

11/24/2005 4:32:31 PM

i like how it looks like condi is walking behind the pack with her head bowed

11/24/2005 4:48:56 PM

Hmm, which CIA report to believe.

And if you believe anything Joe Wilson says then you're a bigger fool than 1st thought.

11/24/2005 5:21:20 PM

You're saying Joe Wilson lied about Iraq not trying to buy enriched uranium from Niger?

11/24/2005 5:23:14 PM

Joe Wilson - confirmed liar

http://mcconnell.senate.gov/record.cfm?id=224452&start=1

]

11/24/2005 5:26:53 PM

Quote :

"“NBC aired 40 reports on Wilson’s claims. CBS aired 30 reports, while ABC aired 18. Newspapers didn’t hold back either. The New York Times printed 70 articles reinforcing these allegations, while the Washington Post printed 98. “Pundits and politicians gorged themselves on the story. “Joe Wilson rose to great fame on the back of this inflammatory charge: He wrote a book for which he received a five-figure advance, he was lionized by the Liberal Left, and he became an advisor to Senator Kerry’s presidential campaign, a campaign to which he is also a financial contributor. “Of course, we now know Wilson’s allegation was false. And we know the chief proponent of this charge, Joe Wilson, has been proven to be a liar. “After more than a year of misrepresentation and obfuscation, two bipartisan reports from two different countries have thoroughly repudiated Wilson’s assertions and determined that President Bush’s 16-word statement about Iraq’s efforts to procure uranium from Niger was well founded. “In fact, the real 16-word statement we should focus on is the one from Lord Butler’s comprehensive report about British intelligence: “We conclude that the statement in President Bush’s State of the Union address… is well founded.” “Let me repeat: “We conclude that the statement in President Bush’s State of the Union address… is well founded.” Those are 16 words to remember, Mr. President. “It is now worth the Senate’s time to consider Mr. Wilson’s claims. “Claim #1 is Wilson’s assertion his Niger trip report should have debunked the State of the Union claim. “On this bold allegation, the Senate’s bipartisan report included this important conclusion: The report on the former ambassador’s trip to Niger, disseminated in March 2002, did not change any analysts’ assessments of the Iraq-Niger uranium deal. For most analysts, the information in the report lent more credibility to the original CIA reports on the uranium deal… “Let me repeat: “For most analysts, the information in the report lent more credibility to the original CIA reports on the uranium deal…” ”Claim #2 is similarly egregious. “According to the Washington Post, “Wilson provided misleading information to the Washington Post last June. He said then that he concluded the Niger intelligence was based on a document that had clearly been forged…” But “the documents…were not in U.S. hands until eight months after Wilson made his trip to Niger.” (Susan Schmidt, Washington Post, A9, 7/10/04) “Predictably, this bombshell appeared on page A9. Page A9, Mr. President! After this story had previously enjoyed extensive coverage on Page A1. “There were indeed document forgeries, but these documents were not the only evidence that convinced foreign intelligence services about Iraq’s efforts to purchase uranium. “Damningly, the former Prime Minister of Niger himself believed the Iraqis wanted to purchase uranium and according to the Financial Times: “European intelligence officers have now revealed that three years before the fake documents became public, human and electronic intelligence sources from a number of countries picked up repeated discussion of an illicit trade in uranium from Niger. One of the customers discussed by the traders was Iraq.” “And the Wall Street Journal has reported that: “French and British intelligence (services) separately told the U.S. about possible Iraqi attempts to buy uranium in Niger.” (WSJ, 7/19/04) “Mr. President, when the French corroborate a story that Iraq is seeking WMD, you’re probably in the right ballpark. “Indeed, the Senate’s bipartisan report concluded that at the time: “it was reasonable for analysts to assess that Iraq may have been seeking uranium from Africa based on CIA reporting and other available intelligence.” “Claim #3 is Wilson’s repeated denial that his wife, Valerie Plame, a CIA analyst, never recommended him for the Niger trip. “In his ironically titled book, The Politics of Truth, Wilson claimed: “Valerie had nothing to do with the matter…She definitely had not proposed that I make the trip.” “The facts are, Mr. President, the bipartisan Senate Intelligence Report includes testimony that Plame “offered up his name” and quotes a memo that Plame wrote that asserts “my husband has good relations with Niger officials.” “The New York Times recently reported that: “Instead of assigning a trained intelligence officer to the Niger case, though, the C.I.A. sent a former American Ambassador, Joseph Wilson, to talk to former Niger officials. His wife, Valerie Plame, was an officer in the counterproliferation division, and she had suggested that he be sent to Niger, according to the Senate report.” (NYT, 7/14/04) ”That story, Mr. President, can be read on Page A14. “Claim #4 is Wilson’s allegation that the CIA warned the White House about the Niger claim and that the White House manipulated intelligence to bolster its argument for war. Wilson charged: “The problem is not the intelligence but the manipulation of intelligence. That will all come out despite (Sen.) Roberts’ effort to shift the blame. This was and is a White House issue, not a CIA issue.” This reckless charge by Wilson was, we know, repeated by many of the President’s critics. ”Of course, it’s not true. “The Senate Intelligence Report determined the White House did not manipulate intelligence, but rather that the CIA had provided faulty information to policymakers. And the Washington Post recently reported that “Contrary to Wilson’s assertions… the CIA did not tell the White House it had qualms about the reliability of the Africa intelligence.” (Susan Schmidt, Washington Post, A9, 7/10/04) "

11/24/2005 5:29:26 PM

so then Dick should be removed from office?

11/24/2005 5:33:13 PM

Why, did Cheney make Wilson lie repeatedly?

11/24/2005 5:34:26 PM

no but that bastard lies all the time

11/24/2005 5:44:09 PM

Cheney drinks puppy blood. Making someone lie would be no problem.

11/24/2005 5:46:59 PM

Quote :

"Top CIA leak investigation falsehoods As U.S. attorney Patrick J. Fitzgerald's two-year investigation into the CIA leak case reportedly draws to a close, the long-standing debate over the origins of the scandal, the merits of the federal investigation, and the legal authority of the prosecutor has intensified greatly. At issue is the disclosure to the press of the identity of CIA agent Valerie Plame, which first appeared in syndicated columnist Robert D. Novak's July 14, 2003, column. Bush administration officials allegedly leaked her identity in order to discredit her husband, former ambassador Joseph C. Wilson IV, a vocal critic of the White House's decision to go to war with Iraq. In this rhetorical environment characterized by limited information and boundless speculation, those defending the officials at the center of Fitzgerald's probe have advanced numerous falsehoods and distortions. As Media Matters for America documents below, the media have not only failed to challenge many of these claims, but also repeated them. Falsehood: It is legally significant whether the leakers disclosed Plame's name in their conversations with reporters Shortly after Newsweek published an email by Time magazine reporter Matthew Cooper to Time Washington bureau chief Mike Duffy saying that, according to White House deputy chief of staff Karl Rove, "Wilson's wife" worked at the CIA, Rove's lawyer responded by noting that his client had not stated her actual name. Several news outlets went on to report Rove's response as if his reported omission of Plame's name was relevant to whether he violated the law. Simultaneously, commentators such as former presidential adviser David Gergen and Washington Times chief political correspondent Donald Lambro, as well as the Republican National Committee (RNC), began to advance the argument that because Rove didn't specifically name her, he did not reveal her identity. But whether leakers identified Plame as "Valerie Plame," "Valerie Wilson," or "Wilson's wife" is irrelevant, both as a practical matter and likely as a legal matter. Practically speaking, a quick Google search of Joseph Wilson at the time would have produced Plame's actual name. As such, administration defenders have declared that whether her name was mentioned to reporters likely has no bearing on whether there was a violation of the law. Despite having previously implied that there is a meaningful distinction between disclosing her name and her identity before, Rove's attorney, Robert Luskin, later conceded that drawing such a line was "too legalistic." Similarly, Victoria Toensing, the Republican lawyer who helped draft the potentially applicable 1982 Intelligence Identities Protection Act (IIPA), agreed that the use of her name is "not an important part of whether this is a crime or not." Nonetheless, numerous media figures recently revived this claim in the wake of New York Times reporter Judith Miller's revelation that the source who told her that Plame worked at the CIA, Vice President Dick Cheney's chief of staff I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby, also never disclosed her actual name. Falsehood: Wilson said that Cheney sent him to Niger An RNC talking points memo made public on July 12 accused Wilson of falsely claiming "that it was Vice President Cheney who sent him to Niger." The allegation that Wilson had lied about the genesis of his trip was soon repeated by RNC chairman Ken Mehlman, who argued that this fact justified the purported leaking of Plame's identity to the press and that the White House had simply been attempting to set the record straight. New York Times columnist David Brooks made this argument at least twice (here and here). And a string of journalists and commentators -- including CNN's Dana Bash, The Washington Post's Mike Allen, Newsweek's Jon Meacham, and U.S. News and World Report's Michael Barone -- parroted the allegation during news reports and media appearances in the following weeks. NBC chief foreign affairs correspondent Andrea Mitchell recently repeated the claim as a guest on MSNBC's Hardball with Chris Matthews. But Wilson never said that Cheney sent him to Niger. To support this accusation, the RNC had misrepresented his July 6, 2003, op-ed in The New York Times and distorted a remark he made in an August 3, 2003, interview on CNN's Late Edition with Wolf Blitzer. Contrary to their allegation, Wilson clearly stated in the op-ed that "agency officials" had requested he travel to Niger. Further, in the CNN appearance, he stated it was "absolutely true" that Cheney was unaware he went on the trip. Falsehood: Plame suggested Wilson for the trip to Niger In their ongoing attempts to justify the alleged leaks, Mehlman and other supporters claimed that the White House had a legitimate interest in setting the record straight by disclosing that Plame, not Cheney, was actually responsible for Wilson being sent to Niger. In a January 2005 Washington Post op-ed, attorneys Victoria Toensing -- a friend of Novak -- and Bruce W. Sanford framed the leak in such a light and suggested that Novak outed Plame because he wanted to "expose wrongdoing" -- i.e., the alleged nepotism that led to Wilson's assignment. Numerous reporters subsequently repeated that Plame suggested Wilson for the trip, including The Washington Post's Jim VandeHei, MSNBC host Chris Matthews, and, most recently, MSNBC correspondent David Shuster. But what these reporters stated as fact is actually in dispute. Unnamed intelligence officials have been quoted in the media claiming that the CIA -- not Plame -- selected Wilson for the mission. Also, CIA officials have disputed the accuracy of a State Department intelligence memo that reportedly indicates that Plame "suggested" Wilson's name for the trip. Novak himself claimed that the Senate Intelligence Committee, in its 2004 "Report on the U.S. Intelligence Community's Prewar Intelligence Assessments on Iraq," concluded that Plame suggested the trip. In fact, the committee did not officially conclude that she had been responsible for Wilson's assignment. Falsehood: Wilson was not qualified to investigate the Niger claims In conjunction with the claim that nepotism led to the selection of Wilson for the trip to Niger, several conservative media figures have attempted to cast the former ambassador as unqualified to investigate the claims that Iraq attempted to purchase uranium yellowcake form the African country. Toensing has repeatedly claimed that he lacked "any experience in WMD" and "any kind of senior experience in that country." National Review Washington editor Kate O'Beirne has described Wilson as "no expert in weapons of mass destruction." But Wilson possessed extensive diplomatic experience, had specialized in Africa during most of his career, and had taken a similar trip to Niger in 1999 to investigate possible purchases by Iran. Falsehood: Plame's CIA employment was widely known In an apparent effort to undermine the possibility that the alleged White House leakers committed a crime, both The Washington Times editorial page and right-wing radio host Rush Limbaugh have argued that Plame's identity was known by many in Washington, D.C., at the time Novak published his column outing her as "an agency operative." As support for this argument, the Times claimed that "numerous neighbors were aware that she worked for the agency." In fact, none of the neighbors cited in The Washington Times' own news reports or in other reports said that they knew before reading the Novak column that Plame worked at the CIA. Her acquaintances told reporters that they believed she worked as a private "consultant." Falsehood: Fitzgerald must prove that Plame's covert status was leaked Recent reports from a number of news outlets have attributed legal significance to whether Rove and Libby leaked Plame's covert status to the press. But as with the issue of whether Plame's actual name was leaked, whether the officials communicated her status as a covert operative is likely not relevant to the question of whether their actions violated federal law. According to news reports, a 2003 State Department memo -- which was likely read by top administration officials during a trip to Africa -- designated as "S" for "secret" a section mentioning Plame, even though it did not mention her covert status. Therefore, the information allegedly disclosed by Rove and Libby -- that she worked at the CIA -- was apparently classified. "

http://mediamatters.org/items/200510220001]

[Edited on November 24, 2005 at 6:18 PM. Reason : more]

11/24/2005 6:18:35 PM

^ Typical leftwing blog nonsense. All of your proof is nothing more than pure speculation.

11/24/2005 6:20:22 PM

And you cited that right wingnut Mitch McConnell...oops I mean you didn't cite your source. I wonder why.

11/24/2005 6:22:41 PM

It's clear in the link, genius.

Mitch McConnell is a respect United States Senator. Your anonymous leftwing blog is just something for your personal mental masturbation.

11/24/2005 6:24:00 PM

wlfpack4life

more like

fuckingretard4bush

11/24/2005 7:04:52 PM

Quote :

"i like how it looks like condi is walking behind the pack with her head bowed"

she is

those are Saudis, man

they don't fuck around... and they've got stuff we need
so we'll take all of the abuse, denigration and casualties necessary to keep that sweet, sweet oil flowing

11/24/2005 10:37:15 PM

oh hush snewf

or you'll upset our resident expert on muslim culture

fuckingretard4bush

11/24/2005 11:20:38 PM

^^ or the Colbert Report haha

11/24/2005 11:33:47 PM

omg scratch that....lol

11/25/2005 1:06:44 AM

news flash, Kerry: you shoulda brought this shit up a year and a half ago...

11/25/2005 2:06:25 AM

^ He would have lost worst if he did.

He should have had a more clearly defined platform though, and articulated it.

11/25/2005 2:32:26 AM

Quote :

"you'll upset our resident expert on muslim culture"

he didn't say he was an expert on it, he was advocating that we change their culture

and then you got your panties all into a bunch because someone actually had the audacity to suggest that a culture should be changed

11/25/2005 8:05:32 AM

I happen to believe that such silly beliefs such as freedom and the right to self-govern transcend cultural differences. Those who use the excuse that muslims/arabs cannot handle being a free people either think that they are culturally/ethnically inferior or simply need to have their values or lack thereof challenged and readjusted.

11/25/2005 9:14:03 AM

Quote :

"You're kidding right? Plz to look up "congressional oversight". Then grab a US history book, preferably something that covers from FDR onward and includes a Supreme Court case or two. There are dozens upon dozens upon dozens of times where Congress gets more classified information than the President, much less "some information the President has access to"..."

Name one instance where Congress gets some information that cannot be disclosed to the President.

11/25/2005 9:39:08 AM

^^ honestly i would like to believe you but what you're saying is not reality. Freedom as we see it in the United States will not exist in the middle east in our life times. When Theocracies still exist in the area it will not give way to democracy. And for that same point

Quote :

"A man who became a billionaire by selling pizzas is to create a new university and town dedicated to promoting conservative Roman Catholicism. Tom Monaghan, a rightwing Republican and one of the leading opponents of abortion in the US, wants the new university to "help more people get to heaven". Mr Monaghan, the founder of Domino's Pizza, grew up in Catholic orphanages and foster homes in Michigan and once planned to be a priest. A former marine, he bought his first pizzeria with his brother in Ypsilanti, Michigan, in 1960 for a downpayment of $75. In 1998, he sold the chain for about $1bn (£610m). Now, Mr Monaghan, 65, is to use $200m of that money to create Ave Maria University, near Naples in Florida. His decision is partly prompted by his belief that some of the nation's 235 Catholic universities and colleges have become too liberal and have strayed from the church's basic teachings. "For 25 years, I've felt the need for a school with more spirituality," Mr Monaghan told the New York Times. "The reason God created us was to earn heaven, so we could be with him, and my goal is to help more people get to heaven. "You can't follow the rules of God unless you know what they are and why they are. At some Catholic universities, students graduate with their religious faith more shaky than when they arrive." Mr Monaghan has made no secret of his views. His anti-abortion activities prompted a boycott of Domino's by women's groups coordinated by the National Organisation for Women. Ave Maria University will have none of the gay groups that exist at other universities, and men's and women's living quarters will be strictly segregated. Mr Monaghan has been criticised for spending the money on creating a new Catholic institution when many already exist, rather than on projects that would directly help the poor."

i couldnt find the exactly article i had read before but apparently no condoms or birth control will be sold as well. This may seem silly but the whole idea of this city goes against the idea of Freedom and the American way. PEOPLE WILL MOVE THERE B/C THEY BELIEVE IN THE CITY. the middle east is the same way its just huge and if u dont like the way shit is done you get killed.

11/25/2005 9:58:45 AM

Quote :

"and then you got your panties all into a bunch because someone actually had the audacity to suggest that a culture should be changed"

oh so i guess we shouldn't get upset at the radical muslims that want to destroy our culture

i mean, all their doing is suggesting our culture change, and doing something about it

right?

same exact thing, and don't you dare try to say it isn't

11/25/2005 10:52:51 AM

you're right, it is approximately the same thing.

difference is - our culture is superior, which is why we're kicking their asses all over the middle east

11/26/2005 11:13:19 PM

yeah, the size of our nation has nothing to do with it!

WHAT A JOKE!

11/26/2005 11:16:36 PM

Quote :

"our culture is superior"

care to quantify this

hell, i'd like to know exactly what gives you the moral high ground to make such an assertion

11/26/2005 11:19:55 PM

and there you go again implying moral equivalence among ALL cultures no matter how depraved, oppressive, or fundamentalist they are.


[Edited on November 26, 2005 at 11:21 PM. Reason : s]

11/26/2005 11:21:17 PM

i love how in one thread i'm being called a racist for thinking the middle east will never harbor democracy

and in another i'm being called mr. muslim because i don't automatically assume they're a terrible culture...

11/26/2005 11:24:18 PM

Quote :

"depraved, oppressive, or fundamentalist they are."

ps
you over-estimate our culture

fuck modern america

fuck it in its little ass

11/26/2005 11:25:21 PM

yes you know what, we're so horrible. our culture is so god-awful that we're at about the same level as cultures who view women as possessions that can be beaten and deprived of rights.

you know what - i'd give you 2 minutes in saudi arabian, syrian, or pakistani culture before you come sobbing back to the good old "tight assed american" culture.

2 fucking minutes, you piece of shit. fuck your adolescent need to rebel against the system. open your fucking eyes. we have freedom of religion. women are treated 95% equal to men. and we're working to improve that. we have one of the lowest unemployment rates in the world. etc. etc. etc.

oh but shit, you're right, its our culture that deserves the scorn - not the culture that encourages its CHILDREN to strap on dynamite and blow up weddings and restaurants



"NO BLOOD FOR OIL EHEHEHE"

[Edited on November 26, 2005 at 11:34 PM. Reason : s]

11/26/2005 11:33:25 PM