I dont think he likes W too much

[ChasingBlueSky 0]

Quote

As I said before, I find it amazing the guy wasn't immediately shot and that he got off the second shoe. For all anybody knew at the time it could have been a grenade.

The room and people were cleared to be in the room. The USSS knew he had no weapon on him, as did Bush. The level of violence this reporter could do would be minimal no matter what.

Shooting that reporter would have been the biggest mistake they could have made.

_________________________________________
you can burn the land and boil the sea, but you can't take the sky from me....
I WILL fly again.....

[kbordson 8]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

He took his fucking shoe off and threw it at the President like a child having a hissy fit. If you think behavior like that is appropriate in any situation then there's no reasoning with you.

It's better than bombing someone else's country that presents no threat to you, and killing hundreds of thousands of their citizens, just because their leader is a bastard. Hard for women and children to argue with B52s.

So... justification of violence with "but he's a bad guy" is ok for them to do against us, but not him to do against them? You do know that "bad guy" is just a subjective term. And when you advocate or condone ANY violence, you are placing yourself in to that category as well.

Interesting that you consider throwing a shoe and carpet bombing to be in the same league..

Can you reference the Executive Order that had the B52's carpet bomb the women and children? I would have more respect for your statement if they were based in fact.

B52s were used to drop cluster bombs during the Iraq invasion March-April 2003. Nice weapons, cluster bombs. Much of the world recently signed a treaty to ban them, but the USA refused.

You're still not giving a reference to the Executive Order.

And....

You know the joke about the man asking the woman if she would have sex with him for a million dollars and she said yes. Then he asks "how about $10?" The "punchline" was - it's already established that you're a hooker, now we're just bartering.

You seem to be condoning violence. Now you're just trying to bicker like that lady. You have lines that some violence is ok. Where are your lines?

Only against certain people?
Only with certain objects?
Only if you're REALLY REALLY REALLY mad?

What are your lines?

[ChasingBlueSky 0]

Quote

With about 100,000 Iraqi dead, it's a good possibility that the reporter had friends and maybe even family killed by Americans. If another dictator came to the US and killed our friends and family, it would be entirely appropriate to throw shoes at him.

Just an FYI, he was a reporter assigned to the Sadr region where he had family. He has lost multiple friends and family from the war.

And people, violence or not...shoe or whatever....it was about the message and nothing else. It's a message the entire world got to see. It was an embarrassing moment for the host country but it's an image that is far more damaging to the US.

_________________________________________
you can burn the land and boil the sea, but you can't take the sky from me....
I WILL fly again.....

[nipp1e_boy 2]

Hi all - new here but have been skydiving for a while almost as long as I hav ebeen voting. I voted for W both times but this last incident makes me glad hes not running again. If he can piss of a journalist enough to throw both shoes at him, he must be a real d-bag.

I mean did anyone think about what happens to that reporter when he has to walk home barefoot? I havent been to Baghdad (though I love Moroccoan food), but I see on TV that the roads are pretty dusty. Hope hes got a tube of gold bond.

Nipple Boy
A-19820

"Safety First! Fun Forever!"

[kallend 2,027]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

He took his fucking shoe off and threw it at the President like a child having a hissy fit. If you think behavior like that is appropriate in any situation then there's no reasoning with you.

It's better than bombing someone else's country that presents no threat to you, and killing hundreds of thousands of their citizens, just because their leader is a bastard. Hard for women and children to argue with B52s.

So... justification of violence with "but he's a bad guy" is ok for them to do against us, but not him to do against them? You do know that "bad guy" is just a subjective term. And when you advocate or condone ANY violence, you are placing yourself in to that category as well.

Interesting that you consider throwing a shoe and carpet bombing to be in the same league..

Can you reference the Executive Order that had the B52's carpet bomb the women and children? I would have more respect for your statement if they were based in fact.

B52s were used to drop cluster bombs during the Iraq invasion March-April 2003. Nice weapons, cluster bombs. Much of the world recently signed a treaty to ban them, but the USA refused.

You're still not giving a reference to the Executive Order.

And....

And what does the order number matter unless the USAF dropped cluster bombs without permission? All you're doing is throwing dust in the air to try to distract attention from the FACT that BUSH did order the bombing of Iraq that killed women and children.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[kbordson 8]

Quote

And what does the order number matter unless the USAF dropped cluster bombs without permission? All you're doing is throwing dust in the air to try to distract attention from the FACT that BUSH did order the bombing of Iraq that killed women and children.

Bush did not post an order to bomb women and children. You are demonizing him to justify your hate for him. He is a man. He has made some REALLY bad decisions and yes, people HAVE died because of his orders. But he did NOT order the Air Force to specifically target the women and children.

You can be disappointed in the policies of this government, but when you then approve of violent acts yourself.... where do you stand?

[kallend 2,027]

Quote

Quote

And what does the order number matter unless the USAF dropped cluster bombs without permission? All you're doing is throwing dust in the air to try to distract attention from the FACT that BUSH did order the bombing of Iraq that killed women and children.

Bush did not post an order to bomb women and children. You are demonizing him to justify your hate for him. He is a man. He has made some REALLY bad decisions and yes, people HAVE died because of his orders. But he did NOT order the Air Force to specifically target the women and children.
?

STRAWMAN.

Please link to the post where I claimed Bush ordered the bombing of women and children. Bush ordered bombing - period.

Collateral damage in the form of killing women and children is absolutely predictable when bombing from aircraft over cities. Don't pretend otherwise.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[kbordson 8]

Why do you keep avoiding the self reflection?

[kallend 2,027]

Quote

Why do you keep avoiding the self reflection?

You're doing it for me.

I do NOT equate throwing a shoe with ordering the bombing of a city. You have done in this thread.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[kbordson 8]

Kallend

I'm done here.

I have very little respect for your method of debate or discussion.

Laugh over this, support those that laugh over this, condone whatever level of violence you find appropriate.

I just don't care.

[Amazon 7]

Quote

Hi all - new here but have been skydiving for a while almost as long as I hav ebeen voting. I voted for W both times but this last incident makes me glad hes not running again. If he can piss of a journalist enough to throw both shoes at him, he must be a real d-bag.

I mean did anyone think about what happens to that reporter when he has to walk home barefoot? I havent been to Baghdad (though I love Moroccoan food), but I see on TV that the roads are pretty dusty. Hope hes got a tube of gold bond.

Want to bet on his walking ANYWHERE for a long .. long... time... if ever???

[skydyvr 0]

Quote

>If someone threw a shoe at you...I bet you would not say the same thing.

Let's see. Tom threw a Teva at me one day. Not technically a shoe, I guess, but I still didn't think he "committed violence towards me." Didn't even have him arrested. I suspect you would not, either.

It's truly hilarious how far you'll go to defend a weak position once you've put it out there.

You have no case, and the antics of your friend Tom haven't helped you build one in the slightest.

Throwing objects at people with intent to harm IS a violent act, even if W is the target.

Give it up man, you're wrong this time.

. . =(_8^(1)

[labrys 0]

Quote

I'm done here.

It seems that you really want to step away for a while but can't quite get there. Seriously... take a break. You're a good person I think... and you appear to need a vacation from SC.

Owned by Remi #?

[Ron 10]

Quote

Let's see. Tom threw a Teva at me one day. Not technically a shoe, I guess, but I still didn't think he "committed violence towards me."

As always...you try to blur an issue. I bet Tom was not mad at you. You fail to see how throwing something at someone in anger is violence...Well you have that right, but I personally think you are just being difficult to be difficult.

I bet that if someone yelled insults at you and threw a shoe at you...You would at the very least ban them.

"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

[billvon 2,991]

>Throwing objects at people with intent to harm IS a violent act, even
>if W is the target.

I agree! If he was throwing an object with the goal of harming someone, rather than just grandstanding or making a political statement, then it can indeed be a violent act. Throwing a shoe at someone for other reasons, whether it's Tom to get my attention, Kate to get someone in the far wacker to stop talking, or a reporter to make a political statement, is not.

This, of course, is something most reasonable people understand, which is why the jails are not full of people like Tom and Kate.

[billvon 2,991]

>I bet Tom was not mad at you.

Right, he was just annoyed that they were dirt diving and I was lagging.

>You fail to see how throwing something at someone in anger is violence.

And you fail to see how throwing a knife at someone with the intent to injure them is different than throwing a shoe at someone to make a political statement.

>I bet that if someone yelled insults at you and threw a shoe at you...
>You would at the very least ban them.

Not generally an issue. The shoes almost never make it through the monitor, and often I can't hear it when people yell at me over their PC.

[skydyvr 0]

Go to an upcoming local political event. Pick someone who's views you disagree with. Hurl a tomato or a shoe at the person from out in the crowd.

What do think will happen? Why?

. . =(_8^(1)

[FallingOsh 0]

Quote

Quote

Why do you keep avoiding the self reflection?

You're doing it for me.

I do NOT equate throwing a shoe with ordering the bombing of a city. You have done in this thread.

What city did we carpet bomb?

--------------------------------------------------
Stay positive and love your life.

[Ron 10]

Quote

Right, he was just annoyed that they were dirt diving and I was lagging.

Then your example is silly. He had no intent to hurt you and he didn't hate you or wish you ill.

Quote

And you fail to see how throwing a knife at someone with the intent to injure them is different than throwing a shoe at someone to make a political statement

Incorrect, you only make that statement since you are trying to be obtuse. I and everyone else knows there is a difference in the amount of damage possible (in the shoe case very little), but a few like you are claiming it was not a violent act at all.

Quote

Not generally an issue. The shoes almost never make it through the monitor, and often I can't hear it when people yell at me over their PC.

Again a nonsense reply from you. This person did not throw a shoe at a monitor.

If someone yelled at you like this guy did and threw a shoe at you....I very much doubt you would not consider it a violent act.

"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

[akarunway 1]

Quote

Quote

Hi all - new here but have been skydiving for a while almost as long as I hav ebeen voting. I voted for W both times but this last incident makes me glad hes not running again. If he can piss of a journalist enough to throw both shoes at him, he must be a real d-bag.

I mean did anyone think about what happens to that reporter when he has to walk home barefoot? I havent been to Baghdad (though I love Moroccoan food), but I see on TV that the roads are pretty dusty. Hope hes got a tube of gold bond.

Want to bet on his walking ANYWHERE for a long .. long... time... if ever???

From what i read there was a trail of blood when they drug him out. I'm sure that was only the beginning. Too bad he missed. if you're gonna pay the price make sure you hit your target.

I hold it true, whate'er befall;
I feel it, when I sorrow most;
'Tis better to have loved and lost
Than never to have loved at all.

[kallend 2,027]

Quote

Kallend

I'm done here.

Fine, I guess you can't really equate thrwoing a shoe to bombing women and children after all.

Quote

I have very little respect for your method of debate or discussion.

No-one forces you to respond to my posts.

Quote

Laugh over this, support those that laugh over this, condone whatever level of violence you find appropriate.

I just don't care.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[kallend 2,027]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Why do you keep avoiding the self reflection?

You're doing it for me.

I do NOT equate throwing a shoe with ordering the bombing of a city. You have done in this thread.

What city did we carpet bomb?

The aerial bombing that missed military/political targets is only one aspect. The Iraq Body Count project has reported that by the end of the major combat phase up to April 30, 2003, 7,299 civilians had been killed, primarily by US air and ground forces.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[Amazon 7]

I am SHOCK and in AWE.. that some people just dont GET IT... they may want to call it collateral damage... rather than the ugly FACT... that Many many thousands of innocent civilians have died in their unnecessary war. IT may not be policy to kill them and we may seek to minimize the deaths of civilians... but I am also quite sure that MOST Iraqi's know exactly who to blame for the war that has killed thousands of them.. and displaced millions.

[Tuna-Salad 0]

HaHa, he still had the same shit eating grin on his face as the first one was being thrown. SS was a bit slow on that one IMO, if it had been a gun someone would of had more than enough time to take aim and fire. (Does the pres wear body armor under his suit?)

Millions of my potential children died on your daughters' face last night.

[labrys 0]

Quote

if it had been a gun someone would of had more than enough time to take aim and fire.

Sure... and those reporters weren't almost stripped to their b'suits and swabbed to death for chemicals before they got into the room. The guy had shoes and he made the best of 'em.

Owned by Remi #?