[Slade]

Firstly, I must concur that JM, you're frothing at the mouth a bit more than usual lately.

Here we go with more anti-"liberal" sentiments too. It's really cute, but it just keeps you all on the same low page. "Conservatives eat babies and want to rule the world!" "Liberals are a bunch of evil, media manipulating wussies!" It's all absurd and trite. Point out some legitmate values and theories you don't agree with instead of just spouting off all of the propaganda you've been fed.

Abbey: Don't make me laugh by calling the media "liberal." That's just as much a joke as it is to say it's conservative. The only thing the mass media supports is the dollar. Death & scandal = ratings. And do you really expect anyone to put any stake into how someone seems to be? (In regards to people seeming "darker" or whatnot in one of your earlier posts.) That gave me a big feeling. And for being quick to point out negative passages in the Quran, you fail to mention the millions of peaceful, tolerant Muslims that don't go around slaying unbelievers.

Jordan: Troop placement doesn't have anything to do with soldiers being "pussies." The problem is trying to distribute authority across a very large area. It takes lots of people. It's as simple as that. No matter how many guns one man is, he can't keep an entire city under control by himself. And again, your "OMFG WE DON'T USE THE OT LOL!" argument still falls flat because you've used it for your own justifications in previous posts.

Mistreatment of POWs: It doesn't matter to what degree it's being done, it's still deliberate humiliation and degredation. "Well, we could have been worse," isn't remotely justifying anything. But Jordan's right; I'm sure most governments couldn't care less about what cigarettes POWs are allowed to smoke.

[Sailor Abbey]

The media is not liberal.

Well, I see the bias. I won’t sit here and pretend that Fox News isn’t bias either, but they seem to at least be less ridiculous about it.

here's some reasons why I disagree with you

Most reporters aren't liberal or biased - right?
Let's see....
- 9 white house correspondents survey voted for Clinton in 1992, while 2 voted for Bush
- 12 voted for Dukakis in 1988 - one for Bush
- 10 voted for Mondale in 1984 - zero for Reagan
- 8 voted for Jimmy Carter in 1980 - 2 for Reagan
Of course, none of these reporters could be biased at all in their reporting.......
Source: US News and World Report White House Reporter Kenneth Walsh
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Another survey...
Of the 1400 members of the national media who were surveyed:


44% considered themselves Democrats
16% Repubs
34% independents
89% voted for Clinton in 1992
7% voted for Bush in 1992


this ones better

[Otal Nimrodi]

LOL, I think you read it wrong Abbey. It's a graph of unemployment, not employment.

So I was RIGHT!

Silly Abbey, you just hurt your case.

[Sailor Abbey]

And do you really expect anyone to put any stake into how someone seems to be? (In regards to people seeming "darker" or whatnot in one of your earlier posts.) That gave me a big feeling.

My point, which I apparently did not illiterate very well, is that I believe in intuition and honest interpretation of character, and that human beings can instinctively tell evil/negative energies from good/positive ones. To say that George Bush is evil or delights in killing is both ridiculous and unfair. George Bush is a person, not a monster. J m keeps putting words into his mouth that are both cruel and perverse. When J m has really met and associated with some real villains, perhaps I will respect his opinion, or at least consider it.

[Jordan]

You have to give JM some points as well. SOME Christians actually are doing just that. I know you've seen those "God says to kill fags" protesters around. You heard the way people in the LIBERAL media were talking on Sept 12 2001, about God and converting heathens and how terrorists "hate freedom." Uncommon all that, yes, but so are suicide bombers.

Is it really that common? I did give him points. I agreed that there are Chrisitan extremists. However, you'd have to go out of your way to justify killing gay people. It's nowhere to be found in the NT. You'd have to claim God spoke to you through a deam and said "kill fags now".

The Quran is very easy to interpret as preaching violence. That was my whole arguement. Then people say, so is the Chrisitan bible. But the degree at which one can read violent passages is minimal in the Chrisitan bible. I mean, most CHristians don't even read their bible. LOL I don't, I should probably start. I know there is a problem with it in congregations cus back in the day when I went to church, I recall the minister always complaining how nobody reads the bible and that bible studies were embarrising for him, he noticed nobody really read it.

Perhaps that's the problem. Islamic followers seem to be more zealous than Chrisitans when it comes to their faith. I recall hearing that on the radio, hank hanigraff, some chrisitan radio personality made that claim, and said it's a shame that Chrisitans don't follow their faith with such devotion.

Jordan: Troop placement doesn't have anything to do with soldiers being "pussies." The problem is trying to distribute authority across a very large area. It takes lots of people. It's as simple as that. No matter how many guns one man is, he can't keep an entire city under control by himself. And again, your "OMFG WE DON'T USE THE OT LOL!" argument still falls flat because you've used it for your own justifications in previous posts.

Well I think the ground troops are doing a good job, 2000 dead over 4 years is pretty impressive. I would have though way more men were going to die. I don't understand the second half of your comment.

I'm still mixed over the war. I want to think it was worth it but deep down inside I have a feeling that nothing will change once the US leaves. Behonest with you I never really cared about the Iraqi people to begin with, sure Saddam sucks but why do I give a shit? He's so far removed from my life that until the war broke out in 91, I never knew who he was, and during the 90's I forgot about him till 2001.

I still believe that article I post way back is the reason why we attacked. It seems like the best answer to the war. What if that article is true? Then it seems like we are forced to bully the world around. But I've been more worried about Russia and China than the middle east. But then i just read an article on how the PLA is really not that menacing, but then I read another article that says it could conduct total war with the US in under 6 years. I don't know what to believe any more.

This post has been edited by Jordan: 15 February 2006 - 07:07 PM

[Slade]

Abbey: Yeah, the unemployment rate is said to have jumped a percentage point there.

Though it's measured by those receiving unemployment checks, and they only last for two years, so the figure isn't quite accurate. It could be more accurately higher or maybe not.

And those websites are biased in that they don't show both sides of the argument. What about all of that nonsense about Kerry mispredicting baseball scores?

[Sailor Abbey]

So I was RIGHT!

Silly Abbey, you just hurt your case.

J m said that unemployment is spiking under Bush. The graph shows that the unemployment rate has been falling in the past few years. This does not hurt my case.

And for being quick to point out negative passages in the Quran, you fail to mention the millions of peaceful, tolerant Muslims that don't go around slaying unbelievers.

I was just pointing out what J m said did not exist. I never claimed to be interpreting it. I frankly don’t care. If I say theres no such thing as Siberian Huskies, I think its fair for somebody to prove otherwise.

And those websites are biased in that they don't show both sides of the argument.

Thats true, but since I'm trying to prove my point, naturally I will only be giving information that does so.

[Jordan]

JM is frothing at the mouth because he is alone in this debate sort of, he's going down gun's a blazing. You're helping him a bit, Slade, but since JYAMG's exit, these debates have been JM vs Renegade and I and now Abbey. Otal has his back but he does not type that much. JM is forced to type page long rebuttals, lol.

[Sailor Abbey]

JM is frothing at the mouth because he is alone in this debate sort of, he's going down gun's a blazing. You're helping him a bit, Slade, but since JYAMG's exit, these debates have been JM vs Renegade and I and now Abbey. Otal has his back but he does not type that much. JM is forced to type page long rebuttals, lol.

I don’t mind taking both sides of a debate, as long as they make sense. Subject matter that is either communist or anarchist in nature doesn’t make any sense to me so its hard for me to sympathize. I like to learn about new ways of thinking, but when people make wild, unsubstantiated observations that they claim as fact, I find it difficult to take anything else that person says seriously.

[J m HofMarN]

Quote

Hmmm. Christians don't rally together and cause terror in the name of God. They don't riot when Christ is mocked in the media. That is the difference. Ya, people who happen to be CHristian do flock to protests in the states. The WTO, IMF, G8 meetings probably had some Christian protestors. But they were most certainly not waving signs that say "we will behead you for breaking our Chrisitan beliefs". IT was not a 'christian thing'.

You could easily compare the IRA, a CATHOLIC group that actually did use terrorism, to Muslim terrorists. The point is that if you fuck with people of any religion enough they're going to start blowing shit up. You can't blame Islam for it just because a few passages noone reads talks about violence, that would be the same as saying that the IRA are justifying their actions from the bible. It has nothing to do with religion, it's about social and economic conditions.

Abby-

Quote

Except that I gave you a complete sentences. I didn’t skip around to make it look like a certain way.

A complete sentence, without its paragraph, can still have a vastly different meaning.

Quote

Kill disbelievers wherever you find them.

My statement is still correct. Nowhere does the Quran order people to just randomly kill anyone who isn't a Muslim. Disbeliever means something different than Unbeliever. Unbelievers don't believe, but disbelief is to actively question. For instance, just because I don't particularly believe in Muhammad, it dosn't mean I'm questioning the veracity of the Quran or anything like that. A disbeliever is one who does that, and who attacks Islam.

Quote

So, at least we never hooked their fillings up to car batteries when we captured them. So we made em wear underwear on their head. Who fucking cares? That’s a fraternity prank, not torture. How bout the wood chippers Saddam used to throw his prisoners into.

Try beating them to death, forcing them to strip naked, and using dogs (considered unclean by Islam) to terrorize them. One female interrogator smeared a Guantanamo prisoner's face with what she told him was period blood. Thirty prisoners have died in US custody and their deaths have been ruled either as murder or suspicious. There have been around 100 suicide attempts at Guantanamo and the UN just stated that the US is torturing people there. And you claim this is just some fraternity prank? If so then so was Auschwitz.

Quote

I’m not talking about getting information from prisoners, I’m talking about free Iraqi x-military who have come out and acknowledged moving the wmds.

Oh, so you see no reason to doubt statements backing up the US viewpoint made by people under US occupation. Why havn't these statements been made to the UN so they can investigate Syria?

Quote

No but you at least have to know what your talking about before anybody will take you seriously.

So in order to know what I'm talking about it's necessary that I travel to Cuba and reside there for an unspecified length of time just to say "Cuba is a good country and should not be ruled by the US." But in order to say "Let's turn Iraq into a fucking smoking crater" all you have to do is cook some intelligence and pay some Iraqi idiots to say there are weapons there? Double standard?

Quote

you either advocate violence or you don’t. You cant have it both ways. Where do you stand again?

I don't advocate violence in the US because at this point the overthrow of the US government is not plausible. I do however understand the use of violence by resistance groups in Palestine, Iraq, Mexico, and I would never condemn them. Now Al Qaida is a different story.

Quote

Dude. How can you really believe he is that horrible. He’s a person! He has feelings! He has a conscience! He has nightmares and he fears for his children when they are sick or in danger! He cries when he’s in pain and he makes love to his wife just like every other human being. God damn J m what the fuck is your problem? For somebody who pretends to care about the human race, you sure are giving one of them the short end of the stick. Do you really believe this shit or are you just arguing for the sake of it. I mean, good god what the fuck?

Where were you to talk about Sheik Ahmed Yassin or Che Guevara or Patrice Lumumba when they were murdered in horiffic fashion by the servants of imperialism? They all had wives and kids too but that didn't stop your friends in the government and their appostate regimes from torturing and killing Guevara or Lumumba at the orders of the CIA. And it didn't stop the Zionists from using a US made missile to blow up the wheel chair bound Yassin. And yet you'd rather take up the defense of Bush, who is responsible for so much more death than all three of those people combined and has gained nothing to show for it and only made the world a less safe place with fewer people in it. People who had wives and children of their own, Abby.

Bush lives in his palace while better men than him rot in mass graves having been dumped there at his command in Iraq and at the command of those like him in Bolivia or Congo or Chile. And when my brothers and I go to protest against him he simply goes on vacation somewhere and ignores us. Bush dosn't need you to defend him, he's doing just fine. But I suppose it's a great deal easier than trying to give voice to those who have none.

Quote

Look, I don’t know enough about the Black Panthers to argue either for or against them. All I’m saying is, you cant have a club based on the colour of your skin and not be racist. Plain and simple.

Of course you don't know about the BPP. It's not information the government would want to be known. Go read up on Fred Hampton sometime, see what racist acts he comitted. The people who fired a hundred rounds into him while he slept with his wife have never been brought to justice for their crimes because they were working under Nixon's orders and you ask me if I advocate violence? Shit, violence has been done plenty, and I only wish it could be returned upon its purpetrators as justice demands. Mumia Abu Jamal, Leonard Peltier, Tim Leary, Fred Hampton, Lyn Stewart, Bunchy Huggins, the Weathermen, Abby Hoffman, aand thousands more should be walking the streets freely now if justice were done, and Reagan and Nixon and Westmoreland, Jay Edgar Hoover and the rest of their wretched kind would be rotting in the jail cells some of the aforementioned currently occupy.

Quote

This last quarter the US Army completely met their quota by 100%.

Yeah but I'm not about to get discouraged. I protested against the recruiters as far back as high school and I've participated in anti-recruiting drives. They may have their pawns for the time being, but if this war keeps going it won't be long before people start listening to those chaps outside the recruiters offices holding the signs and finding better ways to make their livings. And you can say what you like but the efforts of anti-war groups have been making a dent. I've seen it with my own eyes and from comraddes of mine. Pretty soon Bush is going to run out of boys and girls dumb or poor enough to die for him.

Shit, there was one time I put on a grim reaper costume and held a sign that said "Navy: Accelerate you Death". I got more visitors than the navy recruiter and he didn't get a single person the whole day.

In fact, Bush and the conservative Republicans are the ones being positive, saying that our nation is strong and secure and we are winning the war on terror.

More like living in a dream world. Whenever Bush has a chance he sticks to his "terrorism will end next week" theme, but as soon as someone says "Can we have our civil liberties back" or "do you really have to shove that up that Arab's ass?" or "howabout holding non-secret trials?" he starts in with "OMG TEH TERRORISTS WILL BLOW US UP AT ANYMOMENT OMGLOLROFL!"

It's ridiculous double speak. I'm assuming you've never read Orwell though.

Well at least you’ve admitted your intolerance. The next step is to try to get laid... relieve a little tension and maybe smoke some pot or something.

Intolerance of murderers is not intolerance, it's the longing for justice.

You are wrong again.

No I'm not. Unemployment during the Bush administration is still higher than it was when he became president AND higher than it was on average during Clinton's second term as is evinced by the graph.

Jordan and Abby- what I meant by that quote you both laughed at is that Bush is naturally making a half hearted lip service appeal to Iranians in hopes that they might support him. Bin Laden did the same thing in several of his videos, saying that he didnt wish to kill American civilians and that his argument is with our policies against Islamic peoples. The difference is I think Bin Laden was telling the truth and Bush isn't.

[J m HofMarN]

Jordan- The Soviets were fighting because behind them was their home and infront of them were people who wanted to destroy their homes. It's about will power. The US troops can just pack up and go home. The soviets and the Vietnamese couldn't. Except in Afghanistan, and that's just what they did.

Firstly, I must concur that JM, you're frothing at the mouth a bit more than usual lately.

NOW TESTIFY...?

Seriously though. Dealing with statements like "Muslims should live on the moon." or "Let's invade Venezuela" or "Muslims are psychos" it's difficult enough just to keep from calling people smacktards.

Abbey- So when people who's job it is to know what's going on are voting democrat you think it's just because they were predestined to be democrats? Isn't it possible that by actually observing things (as reporters are wont to do) they came to the conclusion that it would be good to vote against monsters like Bush and Reagan? (who actually ranks several Americans among his list of victims)

My point, which I apparently did not illiterate very well, is that I believe in intuition and honest interpretation of character, and that human beings can instinctively tell evil/negative energies from good/positive ones. To say that George Bush is evil or delights in killing is both ridiculous and unfair. George Bush is a person, not a monster. J m keeps putting words into his mouth that are both cruel and perverse. When J m has really met and associated with some real villains, perhaps I will respect his opinion, or at least consider it

Yeah yeah, First I have to go to Cuba, then I have to associate with some professional puppy molesters. I suppose after that you'll say something like "Vader, you must confront vader. Only then, your opinion I will respect."

JM is frothing at the mouth because he is alone in this debate sort of, he's going down gun's a blazing. You're helping him a bit, Slade, but since JYAMG's exit, these debates have been JM vs Renegade and I and now Abbey. Otal has his back but he does not type that much. JM is forced to type page long rebuttals, lol.

Actually Jordan you've done more to help my cause than you have for the imperialist position, and you've done a lot to show the true mindset of imperialism - racism and ignorance namely.

Subject matter that is either communist or anarchist in nature doesn’t make any sense to me so its hard for me to sympathize.

So what you're saying is that you're happy to debate and understand your opponent's perspective as long as they're on the republicrat side or perhaps further to the right.

[civilian_number_two]

Most reporters aren't liberal or biased - right?

Jee, I thought you were claiming that the media was biased, not that a lot of folks who go into reporting are liberals. My mistake. I would like to point out that your claim is like saying that the Ford Motor Company is run by Mexicans.

[Jordan]

Actually Jordan you've done more to help my cause than you have for the imperialist position, and you've done a lot to show the true mindset of imperialism - racism and ignorance namely.

You're just a romantic. You suffer from post slave syndrome. "racist!!! whaaa". I've already told you I have more ethnic friends than you have friends. My old friend from elementary school is an Arab, I don't see him any more but I certainly never saw his skin color.

But there is not point in proving anything to you. You've already told yourself that any one that attacks your freedom fighting heros, must be racist.

This post has been edited by Jordan: 16 February 2006 - 04:40 AM

[Jordan]

I agree that Soviets had more to loose. Therefore fought harder. It's a stupid debate, who knows how over stretched an army is. But I look back at past battles and think if they can do that, then the US can do this. But usually getting attacked helps a lot to strength the will to fight.

[Sailor Abbey]

“A complete sentence, without its paragraph, can still have a vastly different meaning.

My statement is still correct. Nowhere does the Quran order people to just randomly kill anyone who isn't a Muslim. Disbeliever means something different than Unbeliever. Unbelievers don't believe, but disbelief is to actively question. For instance, just because I don't particularly believe in Muhammad, it doesn’t mean I'm questioning the veracity of the Quran or anything like that. A disbeliever is one who does that, and who attacks Islam.”

Lets try this one more time.

You said: Hey, if I read a book and one page says KILL THE UNBELIEVERS (which is never said in the Quran, but just for argument)”

The Quran says: Kill disbelievers wherever you find them. If they attack you, then kill them. Such is the reward of disbelievers. 2:191-2


I’m not talking about context or interpretation. I’m just point out your grammatical error.

“Try beating them to death, forcing them to strip naked, and using dogs (considered unclean by Islam) to terrorize them. One female interrogator smeared a Guantanamo prisoner's face with what she told him was period blood. Thirty prisoners have died in US custody and their deaths have been ruled either as murder or suspicious. There have been around 100 suicide attempts at Guantanamo and the UN just stated that the US is torturing people there. And you claim this is just some fraternity prank?"

To which I again reply: So, at least we never hooked their fillings up to car batteries when we captured them. So we made em wear underwear on their head. Who fucking cares? That’s a fraternity prank, not torture. How bout the wood chippers Saddam used to throw his prisoners into.

“If so then so was Auschwitz.”

Oh here we go… Don’t even start comparing Auschwitz to Guantanamo bay. There IS no comparison.

“Oh, so you see no reason to doubt statements backing up the US viewpoint made by people under US occupation. Why haven’t these statements been made to the UN so they can investigate Syria?”

Well that is possible, but his argument made sense to me and verified intelligence that the military was privy to.

“So in order to know what I'm talking about it's necessary that I travel to Cuba and reside there for an unspecified length of time just to say "Cuba is a good country and should not be ruled by the US."

It would help your argument greatly.

“But in order to say "Let's turn Iraq into a fucking smoking crater" all you have to do is cook some intelligence and pay some Iraqi idiots to say there are weapons there? Double standard?”

You’re making stuff up again. Give me a valid comparison that’s based on fact and I’ll try to answer your question to the best of my ability.

"And yet you'd rather take up the defense of Bush, who is responsible for so much more death than all three of those people combined and has gained nothing to show for it and only made the world a less safe place with fewer people in it. People who had wives and children of their own, Abby."

I will take up the defense of anybody who I believe is an honorable person, whether or not they are responsible for many deaths. I will usually still take up the defense of people who are a little less than honorable but whose cause I can sympothize with. (see my previous list of horrible people whom I have lived with and/or known). I take Bush’s defense because I believe he is a good man and he is doing what he believes is wright for his countrymen. I don’t know a whole lot about those other folks you mentioned so I cant say I have an opinion. Chances are, I'd probably defend them in the same way. I dont consider Hitler or Bin Laden to be monsters either, and I dont go making up fictional conversations they have with their comrades in which they discuss committing atrocities.

“And when my brothers and I go to protest against him he simply goes on vacation somewhere and ignores us.”

Everybody needs a vacation.

“Bush dosn't need you to defend him, he's doing just fine. But I suppose it's a great deal easier than trying to give voice to those who have none.”

Well his excellencey probably doesnt need your defending him either, but you still do it.

“Of course you don't know about the BPP. It's not information the government would want to be known.”

Mostly I just don’t care.

"Yeah but I'm not about to get discouraged. I protested against the recruiters as far back as high school and I've participated in anti-recruiting drives. "

Isnt it nice to live in a country where you can just protest anything you want without fear of being shot in the street. Good for you! Way to exercise your rights!

“Pretty soon Bush is going to run out of boys and girls dumb or poor enough to die for him.”

We server our country, not our president. Thanks for the insult though! (p.s. I had a free ride to collage but still chose to serve my country you fucking prick) (P.P.S I hate to resort to name calling but that last thing about boys and girls dumb or poor enough really hurt)

“I got more visitors than the navy recruiter and he didn't get a single person the whole day.”

Maybe that’s because you were standing around in a grim reaper costume holding up a big sign. I would have came to see you too.

“Whenever Bush has a chance he sticks to his "terrorism will end next week" theme,”

Hmmm havent heard that one yet.

“Intolerance of murderers is not intolerance, it's the longing for justice.”

Intolerance is intolerance is intolerance. Get over yourself.

“what I meant by that quote you both laughed at is that Bush is naturally making a half hearted lip service appeal to Iranians in hopes that they might support him.”

From what I understand, the Iranian people (especially the youth) love America. Its not too far out of the question that they would support him. Besides, we wont put troops on the ground. We would just hit the nuclear facilities. They probably wouldn’t hate us too bad.