benny 0 #101 January 26, 2004 Quote Yeah, I bet that before the invasion of Iraq you just couldn't get to sleep at night because you were so worried about your imminent annihilation. That's it, you got it, hit the nail on the head so to speak. Why did so many Americans agree with the invasion of Iraq? Did they care about freedom? No, you didn't here them asking us to invade China after Tianamen. We are, as a nation afraid? The catch is, we shouldn't be. Yeah, they took a rather large swipe at us with 9/11. It hurts to this very day. But I see this commercial all the time from the Dpt. of Homeland (in)Security about how we should all be ready for a terrorist attack.... Umm, no, we shouldn't, because it will never happen to the vast, vast majority of us. I've lived in Israel, I know what it's like to face the threat of terrorism on a daily basis. I've composed a list of places that really don't have to worry about terrorism, any more than they should worry about getting hit by a car (WAR ON CARS!!!). States which do not need to worry about terrorism: Alaska, well maybe environmental terrorism Alabama Arkansas Mississippi Tennessee Oklahoma Idaho Iowa Montana Connecticut (though they are close to NY) Maine Vermont New Hampshire Texas The Dakotas West Virginia Other places, Any where in Nevada other than Las Vegas Upstate New York The Middle of Pennsylvania Maryland and Virginia with the exception of the DC area Alright, carpal tunnel is setting in. Here, I sit, in Cleveland, Tennessee with absolutely no fear of terrorism. Never go to a DZ strip show. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
goose491 0 #102 January 26, 2004 QuoteGoose I ask you if the cops raid a house where they have probable cause to believe there are drugs, but find none and instead find neglected and abused children should they do nothing or protect the children. I see Iraq as the same situation. Yes, GWB may have had bad intel about WMD, but in the end what we have accomplished over there is still the right thing to do. It would be a terrific find for the local police and a very good moment in the life of those abused children. However, I'm assuming the local police had a warrant for the drug raid in the first place? I assume that because you said "probable cause." Aye, there's the rub. Because let's say that while in the process of obtaining that warrant, the FBI decides to go in... No warrant, they just kick in the door, shoot the owner down and rescue the children. Is what they did right? It's wonderful that they rescued the children but that's not the question. Is what they did right? A few more questions (I'm hoping you're standing firm to your original comparison here... and thusly seeing mine) If the FBI had of waited until the local police had a warrant (for drugs), would they have been able to nail him for the abused children? If the FBI had captured the home-owner instead of shooting him down, would he stand trial and be punished for abusing the children?. What is the difference if we go in with or without a warrant? ... of course, we don't have to worry about our perp walking... he's dead. My Karma ran over my Dogma!!! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Jimbo 0 #103 January 26, 2004 QuoteStates which do not need to worry about terrorism: States that don't have to worry about terrorism? How naive are you? Every state has to worry about terrorism. Every single one. That's sort of the idea behind the concept. QuoteThe Middle of Pennsylvania That should be comforting to all of the people who didn't die when United flight 93 didn't crash on 9/11 in the middle of Pennsylvania. - Jim"Like" - The modern day comma Good bye, my friends. You are missed. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kiltboy 0 #104 January 26, 2004 I think you have a greater risk of being involved in a terrorist act if you are near a large population such as a city than you would living on 300 acres of wheat farm. I always wonder if there are potato farmers in Idaho duct taping windows, in the midst of all the potatoes and sod all else, when the alert threat goes to orange? David Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Jimbo 0 #105 January 26, 2004 QuoteI think you have a greater risk of being involved in a terrorist act if you are near a large population such as a city A greater risk in a large population center, definitely. However, it's naive to suggest that folks who don't live in the large population centers have nothing to fear. Naive, or foolish. One or the other. - Jim"Like" - The modern day comma Good bye, my friends. You are missed. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
goose491 0 #106 January 26, 2004 And what would you say of the Canadians who feel they have nothing to fear? Are we Naive or Foolish? The question is not should you be worried, but why should you be worried. My Karma ran over my Dogma!!! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kiltboy 0 #107 January 26, 2004 I'll disagree with you and say that I believe there is nothing to fear. How many people here check their cars before they get in them or leave the seat belt off when they turn the ignition? How many live in a compound and have rounds fired at them from a hill? How many avoid taking the bus where possible? The US is too big for everyone to go around scared all the time. Sure stop the "spectaculars such as 9/11 and that can be achieved with cooperative intel and law enforcement. I would scrap the colour warning system and just tell people that the law enforcement community is fully briefed and is handling the situation. Live your lives and if you do have cause for concern then call the local cops. David Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
andrewstewart 0 #108 January 26, 2004 Quoteit's naive to suggest that folks who don't live in the large population centers have nothing to fear. But you are a skydiver - are you not? So you understand about risk managment. There is a difference between the relative level of risk associated with an activity and the perception of the level of risk. How can you personally worry about terrorism as a direct threat to you as an individual, and yet choose to go skydiving? Which do you think is most likely to kill you? Similarly: what is more likely to kill the average US citizen - a car crash or terrorism? So should people worry more about car crashes or terrorism? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,027 #109 January 26, 2004 QuoteI'll disagree with you and say that I believe there is nothing to fear. How many people here check their cars before they get in them or leave the seat belt off when they turn the ignition? How many live in a compound and have rounds fired at them from a hill? How many avoid taking the bus where possible? The US is too big for everyone to go around scared all the time. Sure stop the "spectaculars such as 9/11 and that can be achieved with cooperative intel and law enforcement. I would scrap the colour warning system and just tell people that the law enforcement community is fully briefed and is handling the situation. Live your lives and if you do have cause for concern then call the local cops. David But it's an election year. That won't help an incumbent.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Gravitymaster 0 #110 January 26, 2004 QuoteQuoteQuote The President doesn't have a crystal ball. He relies on what the Intelligence Community tells him. The entire world-wide Intelligence Community including the UN thought SH had WMDs. For your argument to hold weight, GWB would have had to have been smarter than the entire world-wide Intellegence Community because he would have had to have know SH actually didn't have the WMDs the world thought he had. This is the only way he could have "lied" about Iraq having them is if he knew they didn't. You don't know what he was told by the intelligence community. You only know what he chose to tell Congress and the American people. The congressmen and senators that supported the war only got to hear what they were allowed to hear. And what he and his cronies told us appears to be a massive lie. You don't know either Kallend. The difference is I'm not jumping up and down screaming "he told the truth" I said I wanted to wait until the report came out. I also want an investigation into what he knew and if it turns that he "lied" then I'm willing to let the chips fall where they may. Isn't making a judgement without waiting until you have the all the evidence exactly what you are accusing GWB of doing? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites kallend 2,027 #111 January 26, 2004 QuoteQuoteQuoteQuote The President doesn't have a crystal ball. He relies on what the Intelligence Community tells him. The entire world-wide Intelligence Community including the UN thought SH had WMDs. For your argument to hold weight, GWB would have had to have been smarter than the entire world-wide Intellegence Community because he would have had to have know SH actually didn't have the WMDs the world thought he had. This is the only way he could have "lied" about Iraq having them is if he knew they didn't. You don't know what he was told by the intelligence community. You only know what he chose to tell Congress and the American people. The congressmen and senators that supported the war only got to hear what they were allowed to hear. And what he and his cronies told us appears to be a massive lie. You don't know either Kallend. The difference is I'm not jumping up and down screaming "he told the truth" I said I wanted to wait until the report came out. I also want an investigation into what he knew and if it turns that he "lied" then I'm willing to let the chips fall where they may. Isn't making a judgement without waiting until you have the all the evidence exactly what you are accusing GWB of doing? How long do we have to wait until you're satisfied? Until the end of time? The UN inspectors found nothing, and were effectlively ejected by GWB for being too slow. The US troops found nothing, Kay quit saying he didn't think there's anything, and even Powell now says there probably wasn't anything.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites andrewstewart 0 #112 January 26, 2004 QuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuote The President doesn't have a crystal ball. He relies on what the Intelligence Community tells him. The entire world-wide Intelligence Community including the UN thought SH had WMDs. For your argument to hold weight, GWB would have had to have been smarter than the entire world-wide Intellegence Community because he would have had to have know SH actually didn't have the WMDs the world thought he had. This is the only way he could have "lied" about Iraq having them is if he knew they didn't. You don't know what he was told by the intelligence community. You only know what he chose to tell Congress and the American people. The congressmen and senators that supported the war only got to hear what they were allowed to hear. And what he and his cronies told us appears to be a massive lie. You don't know either Kallend. The difference is I'm not jumping up and down screaming "he told the truth" I said I wanted to wait until the report came out. I also want an investigation into what he knew and if it turns that he "lied" then I'm willing to let the chips fall where they may. Isn't making a judgement without waiting until you have the all the evidence exactly what you are accusing GWB of doing? How long do we have to wait until you're satisfied? Until the end of time? The UN inspectors found nothing, and were effectlively ejected by GWB for being too slow. The US troops found nothing, Kay quit saying he didn't think there's anything, and even Powell now says there probably wasn't anything. He wants to wait for the official "report". And what a thrilling read that will nodoubt be. Totally impartial too, I'd expect. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Gravitymaster 0 #113 January 26, 2004 Well, thats the way its' done in this country whether you like it or not. Did you jump up and down and scream "liar" when Clinton was accused of sexual misconduct or did you decide to wait until all the facts were in? My guess is you rushed to defend him the same way you are slandering GWB now. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Amazon 7 #114 January 26, 2004 QuoteBut maybe it didn't really happen because I couldn't find the story on the Fox News website. Or maybe its search engine isn't as good. Who knows. If it ain't on Rupert Murdoch News.. it never happened. http://encarta.msn.com/encyclopedia_761559921/Murdoch_Rupert.html You can't actually trust the liberal biased news to ever tell the truth you know.. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites andrewstewart 0 #115 January 26, 2004 QuoteWell, thats the way its' done in this country That's jaw dropping naivety if you really believe that, which I don't really think you do. Hardly ANYONE sits back and waits for the "official report". It is the nature of modernity to have instant, pundit-like response to news. That is why Bush worked so hard to create the media impression that there were WMD. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites kallend 2,027 #116 January 26, 2004 QuoteWell, thats the way its' done in this country whether you like it or not. Did you jump up and down and scream "liar" when Clinton was accused of sexual misconduct or did you decide to wait until all the facts were in? My guess is you rushed to defend him the same way you are slandering GWB now. And your guess is incorrect.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites kallend 2,027 #117 January 26, 2004 QuoteWell, thats the way its' done in this country whether you like it or not. . Just like GWB waited until the UN inspectors had finished their job?... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Gravitymaster 0 #118 January 26, 2004 QuoteQuoteWell, thats the way its' done in this country That's jaw dropping naivety if you really believe that, which I don't really think you do. Hardly ANYONE sits back and waits for the "official report". It is the nature of modernity to have instant, pundit-like response to news. That is why Bush worked so hard to create the media impression that there were WMD. Oh please spare me the condescending attitude. Years and years of violating UN Resolutions and you call that instant? Nearly every country in the world thought SH had WMDs and you say GWB "worked hard to create the impression"? Get real!! Sure things are discussed by pundits. Thats the American Way. Bantering back and forth. My point is, unlike you, I'm not making any final judgements until the final report is in. As I've said before, I think this warrents a thourough investigation and let the chips fall where they may. Sorry if you have a problem with that. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites andrewstewart 0 #119 January 26, 2004 Quoteyou say GWB "worked hard to create the impression"? Get real!! What, he didn't? Er... riiiiight. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Amazon 7 #120 January 26, 2004 QuoteOh please spare me the condescending attitude. Years and years of violating UN Resolutions and you call that instant? Nearly every country in the world thought SH had WMDs and you say GWB "worked hard to create the impression"? Get real!! Based on that we need to quickly invade Israel, they have WMD, hell we have sold them weapons for 50 years, have ignored god only knows how many UN resolutions, continually ignored the human rights of the Palestinians, and have killed thousands of people in their raids. Now.. I do not believe that is something that is reality to invade Israel... BUT that is the perception in that part of the world. If you are going to fight an enemy you had better KNOW who he is and WHY he is fighting. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Gravitymaster 0 #121 January 26, 2004 QuoteQuoteOh please spare me the condescending attitude. Years and years of violating UN Resolutions and you call that instant? Nearly every country in the world thought SH had WMDs and you say GWB "worked hard to create the impression"? Get real!! Based on that we need to quickly invade Israel, they have WMD, hell we have sold them weapons for 50 years, have ignored god only knows how many UN resolutions, continually ignored the human rights of the Palestinians, and have killed thousands of people in their raids. Now.. I do not believe that is something that is reality to invade Israel... BUT that is the perception in that part of the world. If you are going to fight an enemy you had better KNOW who he is and WHY he is fighting. O.K. I'm ready to invade. Damn, thats right, we need to get the U.N. to go along. You work on that and I'll wait here. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites SkydiverRick 0 #122 January 26, 2004 QuoteQuote Well... where are the WMD's then? There are none. If the blame for going to war on a fraudulent basis doesn't ultimately belong with the president (since there are no WMD), then who does it belong with? Santa claus? If Bush actually believed that SH had the weapons, it isn't fraudulent. A mistake for sure, but not fraudulent. Has it been proven that he didn't have them? What part of "We know where they are" don't you understand? You didn't answer the question, you asked another one. never pull low......unless you are Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites PhillyKev 0 #123 January 26, 2004 QuoteHas it been proven that he didn't have them? Well, the guy in charge of looking for them said he didn't. What else do you want for proof? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites SkydiverRick 0 #124 January 26, 2004 So should people worry more about car crashes or terrorism? We should try to prevent both. never pull low......unless you are Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites SkydiverRick 0 #125 January 26, 2004 QuoteQuoteHas it been proven that he didn't have them? Well, the guy in charge of looking for them said he didn't. What else do you want for proof? How does he know this? never pull low......unless you are Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next Page 5 of 7 Join the conversation You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account. Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible. Reply to this topic... × Pasted as rich text. Paste as plain text instead Only 75 emoji are allowed. × Your link has been automatically embedded. Display as a link instead × Your previous content has been restored. Clear editor × You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL. Insert image from URL × Desktop Tablet Phone Submit Reply 0
kallend 2,027 #111 January 26, 2004 QuoteQuoteQuoteQuote The President doesn't have a crystal ball. He relies on what the Intelligence Community tells him. The entire world-wide Intelligence Community including the UN thought SH had WMDs. For your argument to hold weight, GWB would have had to have been smarter than the entire world-wide Intellegence Community because he would have had to have know SH actually didn't have the WMDs the world thought he had. This is the only way he could have "lied" about Iraq having them is if he knew they didn't. You don't know what he was told by the intelligence community. You only know what he chose to tell Congress and the American people. The congressmen and senators that supported the war only got to hear what they were allowed to hear. And what he and his cronies told us appears to be a massive lie. You don't know either Kallend. The difference is I'm not jumping up and down screaming "he told the truth" I said I wanted to wait until the report came out. I also want an investigation into what he knew and if it turns that he "lied" then I'm willing to let the chips fall where they may. Isn't making a judgement without waiting until you have the all the evidence exactly what you are accusing GWB of doing? How long do we have to wait until you're satisfied? Until the end of time? The UN inspectors found nothing, and were effectlively ejected by GWB for being too slow. The US troops found nothing, Kay quit saying he didn't think there's anything, and even Powell now says there probably wasn't anything.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites andrewstewart 0 #112 January 26, 2004 QuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuote The President doesn't have a crystal ball. He relies on what the Intelligence Community tells him. The entire world-wide Intelligence Community including the UN thought SH had WMDs. For your argument to hold weight, GWB would have had to have been smarter than the entire world-wide Intellegence Community because he would have had to have know SH actually didn't have the WMDs the world thought he had. This is the only way he could have "lied" about Iraq having them is if he knew they didn't. You don't know what he was told by the intelligence community. You only know what he chose to tell Congress and the American people. The congressmen and senators that supported the war only got to hear what they were allowed to hear. And what he and his cronies told us appears to be a massive lie. You don't know either Kallend. The difference is I'm not jumping up and down screaming "he told the truth" I said I wanted to wait until the report came out. I also want an investigation into what he knew and if it turns that he "lied" then I'm willing to let the chips fall where they may. Isn't making a judgement without waiting until you have the all the evidence exactly what you are accusing GWB of doing? How long do we have to wait until you're satisfied? Until the end of time? The UN inspectors found nothing, and were effectlively ejected by GWB for being too slow. The US troops found nothing, Kay quit saying he didn't think there's anything, and even Powell now says there probably wasn't anything. He wants to wait for the official "report". And what a thrilling read that will nodoubt be. Totally impartial too, I'd expect. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Gravitymaster 0 #113 January 26, 2004 Well, thats the way its' done in this country whether you like it or not. Did you jump up and down and scream "liar" when Clinton was accused of sexual misconduct or did you decide to wait until all the facts were in? My guess is you rushed to defend him the same way you are slandering GWB now. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Amazon 7 #114 January 26, 2004 QuoteBut maybe it didn't really happen because I couldn't find the story on the Fox News website. Or maybe its search engine isn't as good. Who knows. If it ain't on Rupert Murdoch News.. it never happened. http://encarta.msn.com/encyclopedia_761559921/Murdoch_Rupert.html You can't actually trust the liberal biased news to ever tell the truth you know.. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites andrewstewart 0 #115 January 26, 2004 QuoteWell, thats the way its' done in this country That's jaw dropping naivety if you really believe that, which I don't really think you do. Hardly ANYONE sits back and waits for the "official report". It is the nature of modernity to have instant, pundit-like response to news. That is why Bush worked so hard to create the media impression that there were WMD. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites kallend 2,027 #116 January 26, 2004 QuoteWell, thats the way its' done in this country whether you like it or not. Did you jump up and down and scream "liar" when Clinton was accused of sexual misconduct or did you decide to wait until all the facts were in? My guess is you rushed to defend him the same way you are slandering GWB now. And your guess is incorrect.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites kallend 2,027 #117 January 26, 2004 QuoteWell, thats the way its' done in this country whether you like it or not. . Just like GWB waited until the UN inspectors had finished their job?... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Gravitymaster 0 #118 January 26, 2004 QuoteQuoteWell, thats the way its' done in this country That's jaw dropping naivety if you really believe that, which I don't really think you do. Hardly ANYONE sits back and waits for the "official report". It is the nature of modernity to have instant, pundit-like response to news. That is why Bush worked so hard to create the media impression that there were WMD. Oh please spare me the condescending attitude. Years and years of violating UN Resolutions and you call that instant? Nearly every country in the world thought SH had WMDs and you say GWB "worked hard to create the impression"? Get real!! Sure things are discussed by pundits. Thats the American Way. Bantering back and forth. My point is, unlike you, I'm not making any final judgements until the final report is in. As I've said before, I think this warrents a thourough investigation and let the chips fall where they may. Sorry if you have a problem with that. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites andrewstewart 0 #119 January 26, 2004 Quoteyou say GWB "worked hard to create the impression"? Get real!! What, he didn't? Er... riiiiight. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Amazon 7 #120 January 26, 2004 QuoteOh please spare me the condescending attitude. Years and years of violating UN Resolutions and you call that instant? Nearly every country in the world thought SH had WMDs and you say GWB "worked hard to create the impression"? Get real!! Based on that we need to quickly invade Israel, they have WMD, hell we have sold them weapons for 50 years, have ignored god only knows how many UN resolutions, continually ignored the human rights of the Palestinians, and have killed thousands of people in their raids. Now.. I do not believe that is something that is reality to invade Israel... BUT that is the perception in that part of the world. If you are going to fight an enemy you had better KNOW who he is and WHY he is fighting. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Gravitymaster 0 #121 January 26, 2004 QuoteQuoteOh please spare me the condescending attitude. Years and years of violating UN Resolutions and you call that instant? Nearly every country in the world thought SH had WMDs and you say GWB "worked hard to create the impression"? Get real!! Based on that we need to quickly invade Israel, they have WMD, hell we have sold them weapons for 50 years, have ignored god only knows how many UN resolutions, continually ignored the human rights of the Palestinians, and have killed thousands of people in their raids. Now.. I do not believe that is something that is reality to invade Israel... BUT that is the perception in that part of the world. If you are going to fight an enemy you had better KNOW who he is and WHY he is fighting. O.K. I'm ready to invade. Damn, thats right, we need to get the U.N. to go along. You work on that and I'll wait here. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites SkydiverRick 0 #122 January 26, 2004 QuoteQuote Well... where are the WMD's then? There are none. If the blame for going to war on a fraudulent basis doesn't ultimately belong with the president (since there are no WMD), then who does it belong with? Santa claus? If Bush actually believed that SH had the weapons, it isn't fraudulent. A mistake for sure, but not fraudulent. Has it been proven that he didn't have them? What part of "We know where they are" don't you understand? You didn't answer the question, you asked another one. never pull low......unless you are Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites PhillyKev 0 #123 January 26, 2004 QuoteHas it been proven that he didn't have them? Well, the guy in charge of looking for them said he didn't. What else do you want for proof? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites SkydiverRick 0 #124 January 26, 2004 So should people worry more about car crashes or terrorism? We should try to prevent both. never pull low......unless you are Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
andrewstewart 0 #112 January 26, 2004 QuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuote The President doesn't have a crystal ball. He relies on what the Intelligence Community tells him. The entire world-wide Intelligence Community including the UN thought SH had WMDs. For your argument to hold weight, GWB would have had to have been smarter than the entire world-wide Intellegence Community because he would have had to have know SH actually didn't have the WMDs the world thought he had. This is the only way he could have "lied" about Iraq having them is if he knew they didn't. You don't know what he was told by the intelligence community. You only know what he chose to tell Congress and the American people. The congressmen and senators that supported the war only got to hear what they were allowed to hear. And what he and his cronies told us appears to be a massive lie. You don't know either Kallend. The difference is I'm not jumping up and down screaming "he told the truth" I said I wanted to wait until the report came out. I also want an investigation into what he knew and if it turns that he "lied" then I'm willing to let the chips fall where they may. Isn't making a judgement without waiting until you have the all the evidence exactly what you are accusing GWB of doing? How long do we have to wait until you're satisfied? Until the end of time? The UN inspectors found nothing, and were effectlively ejected by GWB for being too slow. The US troops found nothing, Kay quit saying he didn't think there's anything, and even Powell now says there probably wasn't anything. He wants to wait for the official "report". And what a thrilling read that will nodoubt be. Totally impartial too, I'd expect. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Gravitymaster 0 #113 January 26, 2004 Well, thats the way its' done in this country whether you like it or not. Did you jump up and down and scream "liar" when Clinton was accused of sexual misconduct or did you decide to wait until all the facts were in? My guess is you rushed to defend him the same way you are slandering GWB now. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Amazon 7 #114 January 26, 2004 QuoteBut maybe it didn't really happen because I couldn't find the story on the Fox News website. Or maybe its search engine isn't as good. Who knows. If it ain't on Rupert Murdoch News.. it never happened. http://encarta.msn.com/encyclopedia_761559921/Murdoch_Rupert.html You can't actually trust the liberal biased news to ever tell the truth you know.. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites andrewstewart 0 #115 January 26, 2004 QuoteWell, thats the way its' done in this country That's jaw dropping naivety if you really believe that, which I don't really think you do. Hardly ANYONE sits back and waits for the "official report". It is the nature of modernity to have instant, pundit-like response to news. That is why Bush worked so hard to create the media impression that there were WMD. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites kallend 2,027 #116 January 26, 2004 QuoteWell, thats the way its' done in this country whether you like it or not. Did you jump up and down and scream "liar" when Clinton was accused of sexual misconduct or did you decide to wait until all the facts were in? My guess is you rushed to defend him the same way you are slandering GWB now. And your guess is incorrect.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites kallend 2,027 #117 January 26, 2004 QuoteWell, thats the way its' done in this country whether you like it or not. . Just like GWB waited until the UN inspectors had finished their job?... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Gravitymaster 0 #118 January 26, 2004 QuoteQuoteWell, thats the way its' done in this country That's jaw dropping naivety if you really believe that, which I don't really think you do. Hardly ANYONE sits back and waits for the "official report". It is the nature of modernity to have instant, pundit-like response to news. That is why Bush worked so hard to create the media impression that there were WMD. Oh please spare me the condescending attitude. Years and years of violating UN Resolutions and you call that instant? Nearly every country in the world thought SH had WMDs and you say GWB "worked hard to create the impression"? Get real!! Sure things are discussed by pundits. Thats the American Way. Bantering back and forth. My point is, unlike you, I'm not making any final judgements until the final report is in. As I've said before, I think this warrents a thourough investigation and let the chips fall where they may. Sorry if you have a problem with that. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites andrewstewart 0 #119 January 26, 2004 Quoteyou say GWB "worked hard to create the impression"? Get real!! What, he didn't? Er... riiiiight. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Amazon 7 #120 January 26, 2004 QuoteOh please spare me the condescending attitude. Years and years of violating UN Resolutions and you call that instant? Nearly every country in the world thought SH had WMDs and you say GWB "worked hard to create the impression"? Get real!! Based on that we need to quickly invade Israel, they have WMD, hell we have sold them weapons for 50 years, have ignored god only knows how many UN resolutions, continually ignored the human rights of the Palestinians, and have killed thousands of people in their raids. Now.. I do not believe that is something that is reality to invade Israel... BUT that is the perception in that part of the world. If you are going to fight an enemy you had better KNOW who he is and WHY he is fighting. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Gravitymaster 0 #121 January 26, 2004 QuoteQuoteOh please spare me the condescending attitude. Years and years of violating UN Resolutions and you call that instant? Nearly every country in the world thought SH had WMDs and you say GWB "worked hard to create the impression"? Get real!! Based on that we need to quickly invade Israel, they have WMD, hell we have sold them weapons for 50 years, have ignored god only knows how many UN resolutions, continually ignored the human rights of the Palestinians, and have killed thousands of people in their raids. Now.. I do not believe that is something that is reality to invade Israel... BUT that is the perception in that part of the world. If you are going to fight an enemy you had better KNOW who he is and WHY he is fighting. O.K. I'm ready to invade. Damn, thats right, we need to get the U.N. to go along. You work on that and I'll wait here. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites SkydiverRick 0 #122 January 26, 2004 QuoteQuote Well... where are the WMD's then? There are none. If the blame for going to war on a fraudulent basis doesn't ultimately belong with the president (since there are no WMD), then who does it belong with? Santa claus? If Bush actually believed that SH had the weapons, it isn't fraudulent. A mistake for sure, but not fraudulent. Has it been proven that he didn't have them? What part of "We know where they are" don't you understand? You didn't answer the question, you asked another one. never pull low......unless you are Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Gravitymaster 0 #113 January 26, 2004 Well, thats the way its' done in this country whether you like it or not. Did you jump up and down and scream "liar" when Clinton was accused of sexual misconduct or did you decide to wait until all the facts were in? My guess is you rushed to defend him the same way you are slandering GWB now. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Amazon 7 #114 January 26, 2004 QuoteBut maybe it didn't really happen because I couldn't find the story on the Fox News website. Or maybe its search engine isn't as good. Who knows. If it ain't on Rupert Murdoch News.. it never happened. http://encarta.msn.com/encyclopedia_761559921/Murdoch_Rupert.html You can't actually trust the liberal biased news to ever tell the truth you know.. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
andrewstewart 0 #115 January 26, 2004 QuoteWell, thats the way its' done in this country That's jaw dropping naivety if you really believe that, which I don't really think you do. Hardly ANYONE sits back and waits for the "official report". It is the nature of modernity to have instant, pundit-like response to news. That is why Bush worked so hard to create the media impression that there were WMD. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,027 #116 January 26, 2004 QuoteWell, thats the way its' done in this country whether you like it or not. Did you jump up and down and scream "liar" when Clinton was accused of sexual misconduct or did you decide to wait until all the facts were in? My guess is you rushed to defend him the same way you are slandering GWB now. And your guess is incorrect.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,027 #117 January 26, 2004 QuoteWell, thats the way its' done in this country whether you like it or not. . Just like GWB waited until the UN inspectors had finished their job?... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Gravitymaster 0 #118 January 26, 2004 QuoteQuoteWell, thats the way its' done in this country That's jaw dropping naivety if you really believe that, which I don't really think you do. Hardly ANYONE sits back and waits for the "official report". It is the nature of modernity to have instant, pundit-like response to news. That is why Bush worked so hard to create the media impression that there were WMD. Oh please spare me the condescending attitude. Years and years of violating UN Resolutions and you call that instant? Nearly every country in the world thought SH had WMDs and you say GWB "worked hard to create the impression"? Get real!! Sure things are discussed by pundits. Thats the American Way. Bantering back and forth. My point is, unlike you, I'm not making any final judgements until the final report is in. As I've said before, I think this warrents a thourough investigation and let the chips fall where they may. Sorry if you have a problem with that. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
andrewstewart 0 #119 January 26, 2004 Quoteyou say GWB "worked hard to create the impression"? Get real!! What, he didn't? Er... riiiiight. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Amazon 7 #120 January 26, 2004 QuoteOh please spare me the condescending attitude. Years and years of violating UN Resolutions and you call that instant? Nearly every country in the world thought SH had WMDs and you say GWB "worked hard to create the impression"? Get real!! Based on that we need to quickly invade Israel, they have WMD, hell we have sold them weapons for 50 years, have ignored god only knows how many UN resolutions, continually ignored the human rights of the Palestinians, and have killed thousands of people in their raids. Now.. I do not believe that is something that is reality to invade Israel... BUT that is the perception in that part of the world. If you are going to fight an enemy you had better KNOW who he is and WHY he is fighting. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Gravitymaster 0 #121 January 26, 2004 QuoteQuoteOh please spare me the condescending attitude. Years and years of violating UN Resolutions and you call that instant? Nearly every country in the world thought SH had WMDs and you say GWB "worked hard to create the impression"? Get real!! Based on that we need to quickly invade Israel, they have WMD, hell we have sold them weapons for 50 years, have ignored god only knows how many UN resolutions, continually ignored the human rights of the Palestinians, and have killed thousands of people in their raids. Now.. I do not believe that is something that is reality to invade Israel... BUT that is the perception in that part of the world. If you are going to fight an enemy you had better KNOW who he is and WHY he is fighting. O.K. I'm ready to invade. Damn, thats right, we need to get the U.N. to go along. You work on that and I'll wait here. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SkydiverRick 0 #122 January 26, 2004 QuoteQuote Well... where are the WMD's then? There are none. If the blame for going to war on a fraudulent basis doesn't ultimately belong with the president (since there are no WMD), then who does it belong with? Santa claus? If Bush actually believed that SH had the weapons, it isn't fraudulent. A mistake for sure, but not fraudulent. Has it been proven that he didn't have them? What part of "We know where they are" don't you understand? You didn't answer the question, you asked another one. never pull low......unless you are Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
PhillyKev 0 #123 January 26, 2004 QuoteHas it been proven that he didn't have them? Well, the guy in charge of looking for them said he didn't. What else do you want for proof? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SkydiverRick 0 #124 January 26, 2004 So should people worry more about car crashes or terrorism? We should try to prevent both. never pull low......unless you are Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SkydiverRick 0 #125 January 26, 2004 QuoteQuoteHas it been proven that he didn't have them? Well, the guy in charge of looking for them said he didn't. What else do you want for proof? How does he know this? never pull low......unless you are Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
