Moore and O'Reilly

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by nunob

It would bother me if my children died for any reason but its alot easier to swallow that they died to provide you the right to express your views on this than if some terrorist flew a plane into a building and killed them.

---

Hmmm, not once has a terrorist taken away my freedom to express my views, my government has tried in vain attempts to stop the terrorist, but the terrorists themselves never.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ya_know

I
Since so much of these debates are more on the personality of the President being a stupid man, and that he isn’t in charge, and all of that crap…I will give you my personal belief of GWB. I don’t think for one second that he ever wanted to put a soldiers boot on the ground in Iraq until it was absolutely necessary to defend our way of life. He just wouldn’t want that for anyone.

What he did at the time was deemed necessary by intelligence and other fact gathering agencies. Saddam had to go, and we had to send troops in to do it. That was not a decision Bush took lightly, I assure you all that doubt.

---

Defend my way of life? From a two-bit dictator in a third world country that actually had no WMD's all the while the real terrorists were still out there?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jitBob

What do you mean by "coheres"?

---

I meant “coerce”, I guess spell check was working against me in my time of need… :p

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Cleetus

Hmmm, not once has a terrorist taken away my freedom to express my views, my government has tried in vain attempts to stop the terrorist, but the terrorists themselves never.

---

If Hitler had been let go you wouldnt be typing your views in here right now at least not in english.

Saddam wasn't Hitler, two major different players in major different ways, you are really reaching on that one

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Cleetus

Saddam wasn't Hitler, two major different players in major different ways, you are really reaching on that one

---

No Hitler started out by killing the people who threatened his ideas and beliefs. Sadam killed people who opposed him. Where is the difference there? Hitler was let go longer than Sadam is the only difference I see.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Cleetus

Defend my way of life? From a two-bit dictator in a third world country that actually had no WMD's all the while the real terrorists were still out there?

---

Would this be that same two bit dictator that had made an attempt on a US President's life?

Jeebus, nice spin job guys, took me a bit. You still are going all around the simple fact that we were brought to this war with Iraq because of WMD's. Other then what, one war head, there has been absolutly no evidence of WMD's, most of the ties to the terrorists who attacked us on 9-11 have been found false. All you are doing is spinning the story to dilude yourself from the fact that we went to this war on false pretenses and that the Bush presidency duped us, the UN, themselves, and everyone else into believing this.

So now you tell me these stories of evil, bad dictators. Fine and dandy, I hate these guys too. But if you are going to use that excuse, you better come up with a good answer for N Korea, China, all over Africa, and everywhere else where people are under brutal dictators. You better then be prepared for a changing world, if it is now our responsibility to tell the world and every country how it should be run and who brutal you can be.

For me this is scarier then hell itself, as it will only drive more people to become terrorists, which is the exact opposite of what this supposed war is all about.

Also, just to go back...Do you really think Iraq is anywhere equal in power, strength, national pride, resources as Germany was/is? Saddam could never get the national pride out of his people that Hitler was able to pull out of the proud German people. Nope, sorry, Saddam is a two bit guy, Hitler was the real deal, as far as truely evil bastards go.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Cleetus

Jeebus, nice spin job guys, took me a bit. You still are going all around the simple fact that we were brought to this war with Iraq because of WMD's. Other then what, one war head, there has been absolutly no evidence of WMD's, most of the ties to the terrorists who attacked us on 9-11 have been found false. All you are doing is spinning the story to dilude yourself from the fact that we went to this war on false pretenses and that the Bush presidency duped us, the UN, themselves, and everyone else into believing this.

So now you tell me these stories of evil, bad dictators. Fine and dandy, I hate these guys too. But if you are going to use that excuse, you better come up with a good answer for N Korea, China, all over Africa, and everywhere else where people are under brutal dictators. You better then be prepared for a changing world, if it is now our responsibility to tell the world and every country how it should be run and who brutal you can be.

For me this is scarier then hell itself, as it will only drive more people to become terrorists, which is the exact opposite of what this supposed war is all about.

Also, just to go back...Do you really think Iraq is anywhere equal in power, strength, national pride, resources as Germany was/is? Saddam could never get the national pride out of his people that Hitler was able to pull out of the proud German people. Nope, sorry, Saddam is a two bit guy, Hitler was the real deal, as far as truely evil bastards go.

---

Darn it Cleetus. Stop being so right. You're stealing my thunder.

OOPS forgot I am probably on your ignore list so you won't see this.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Cleetus

Jeebus, nice spin job guys, took me a bit. .

---

The spin is from the left, you guys just don't want to let go the WMD's. To date, that's the only failure in Iraq. Everything else was for real...you need to understand that this war was never truly about WMD's...it was about a power hungry dictator hell bent on seeing the end of western civilization as we know it. This is also a very strategic positioning in the Middle East, in a very solid effort to rid the world of organized terrorism, by eliminating the national support of these organizations once and for all. Iraq may not have been part of Al Quada this week, but they had ties to plenty of other terrorist organizations…who gives a phuck about WMD’s??? Al Quada doesn’t even have them, and has never used them? Unless you consider the civilian airliners a WMD…

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Cleetus

Jeebus, nice spin job guys, took me a bit. You still are going all around the simple fact that we were brought to this war with Iraq because of WMD's. Other then what, one war head, there has been absolutly no evidence of WMD's, most of the ties to the terrorists who attacked us on 9-11 have been found false. All you are doing is spinning the story to dilude yourself from the fact that we went to this war on false pretenses and that the Bush presidency duped us, the UN, themselves, and everyone else into believing this.

So now you tell me these stories of evil, bad dictators. Fine and dandy, I hate these guys too. But if you are going to use that excuse, you better come up with a good answer for N Korea, China, all over Africa, and everywhere else where people are under brutal dictators. You better then be prepared for a changing world, if it is now our responsibility to tell the world and every country how it should be run and who brutal you can be.

For me this is scarier then hell itself, as it will only drive more people to become terrorists, which is the exact opposite of what this supposed war is all about.

Also, just to go back...Do you really think Iraq is anywhere equal in power, strength, national pride, resources as Germany was/is? Saddam could never get the national pride out of his people that Hitler was able to pull out of the proud German people. Nope, sorry, Saddam is a two bit guy, Hitler was the real deal, as far as truely evil bastards go.

---

Oh so he's not as good as Hitler so its ok to kill people and try to obtain wmd(power) I think even Hitler started a little slow then grew as he gained more power and terrorized more who opposed him.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by nunob

Oh so he's not as good as Hitler so its ok to kill people and try to obtain wmd(power) I think even Hitler started a little slow then grew as he gained more power and terrorized more who opposed him.

---

You mean like someone questionably voted in, whose party has a large amount of control on the media and the spin, has WMD's, detains people without trial for indeterminate time, starts pre-emptive wars, tells anyone who disagrees that they are no longer patriotic or a traitor or gives aid to the enemy????

Thank god we have the ACLU, the Democrats, Micheal Moore, Al Frankin and the freedom to gain enough intelligence to not fall for the lines that are fed to us daily and voice our concerns on what the government is doing to us.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ya_know

The spin is from the left, you guys just don't want to let go the WMD's. To date, that's the only failure in Iraq. Everything else was for real...you need to understand that this war was never truly about WMD's...it was about a power hungry dictator hell bent on seeing the end of western civilization as we know it. This is also a very strategic positioning in the Middle East, in a very solid effort to rid the world of organized terrorism, by eliminating the national support of these organizations once and for all. Iraq may not have been part of Al Quada this week, but they had ties to plenty of other terrorist organizations…who gives a phuck about WMD’s??? Al Quada doesn’t even have them, and has never used them? Unless you consider the civilian airliners a WMD…

---

Really?!?!?!?

I could have sworn that when Powell went to the UN and to Congress he was arguing action on the "fact" that there were WMD's and therfor Saddam was no longer complying to the UN resolutions which meant we did indeed have a right to go in to check. I must have missed the Powell meetings, and the Bush speeches telling me we were going to war solely to oust a "power hungry dictator". Damn, we really are controlled by a leftist media not giving us the truth :rolleyes:

I will not thank anyone for Michael Moore. He's as wortless as a stain on the bed sheets... :butt:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ya_know

I will not thank anyone for Michael Moore. He's as wortless as a stain on the bed sheets... :butt:

---

I would have thanked the stain on the bed sheets if it meant we didn't have you :thumbs: :flame:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Cleetus

I would have thanked the stain on the bed sheets if it meant we didn't have you :thumbs: :flame:

---

What'eva, Lefty... :butt:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ya_know

What'eva, Lefty... :butt:

---

Ok there, fascist :bor:

Ya_Know, it's interesting Ya_Should say this:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ya_know

...you need to understand that this war was never truly about WMD's...

…who gives a phuck about WMD’s???

---

Apparently, YOU give a phuck about them, or at least you did when you were advocating the Iraq war (boldface done by myself):

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ya_know

You can’t make an argument about this current situation by bring up irrelevant comparisons to past policy of the US. Bottom line—the UN shut down Saddam’s advance into Kuwait. However despite all better judgment stopped and gave Saddam and his war mangled country sovereignty with many conditions. Of those conditions, Iraq was permitted to maintain an army, however certain weapons were banned. UN inspectors were to be permitted into the country to oversee their compliance. For 12 years (really 14) his régime has prevented inspections, consorting with terrorists, devised mass destruction munitions, and stockpiled chemical and biological agents. The UN inspectors now have uncovered this information, and presented it to the council.

Now components of the UN wish not to follow through with their stipulations from the treaties from 12+ years ago, and they are wrong to do so. Iraq has never fully complied with any of the conditions of the treaty. The UN gave Iraq and Saddam a chance 12 years ago.

The US isn’t the bully here, Saddam is. As long as he is permitted to continue to grow his army, in a few years he may try to invade another country. He may try terrorist offensives against innocent people with the chemical agents he has amassed. As a side note, I don’t know if you have ever seen footage of Chemical agent exposure to humans or animals, but I have. It is more inhumane than any bomb you have ever seen. I would rather be blown to pieces then suffer the slow painful death of Human Raid.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wayward Clam

Ya_Know, it's interesting Ya_Should say this:




Apparently, YOU give a phuck about them, or at least you did when you were advocating the Iraq war (boldface done by myself):

---

Slam, and dunk

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wayward Clam

Ya_Know, it's interesting Ya_Should say this:




Apparently, YOU give a phuck about them, or at least you did when you were advocating the Iraq war (boldface done by myself):

---

The fact remains that Saddam failed to comply with inspection mandates constantly, and refused inspections time and time again. In the end, the whole world was surprised that Saddam didn't have WMD's...

To say that Bush was wrong because he should have know...well, let me reemphasize, it wasn't WMD's that put us at war with Iraq. It was an obstinate dictator, one with ties to terrorist groups, known to possess, use, construct, and seek WMD’s that put us on the war path, because when we insisted he comply…he wouldn’t. It's people like you that needed more justification, hence the arguments raged on about their presence, bottom line was, we needed proof he didn’t have them, and the only way we would ever get that proof was to invade, and shut down the régime, because that régime refused to bow down.

(boldface done by myself…)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ya_know

The fact remains that Saddam failed to comply with inspection mandates constantly, and refused inspections time and time again. In the end, the whole world was surprised that Saddam didn't have WMD's...

To say that Bush was wrong because he should have know...well, let me reemphasize, it wasn't WMD's that put us at war with Iraq. It was an obstinate dictator, one with ties to terrorist groups, known to possess, use, construct, and seek WMD’s that put us on the war path, because when we insisted he comply…he wouldn’t. It's people like you that needed more justification, hence the arguments raged on about their presence, bottom line was, we needed proof he didn’t have them, and the only way we would ever get that proof was to invade, and shut down the régime, because that régime refused to bow down.

(boldface done by myself…)

---

So it didn't then have anything to do with his people or democracy?

Al Sharpton of all people:
We thought we would get Weapons of Mass Destruction but instead we got Errors of Mass Deception.

Here are a few of the reasons that I said Moore is an Un-American American:

Moore's movie nothing short of terrorism

Quote:

---

"We Americans suffer from an enforced ignorance. We don't know about anything that's happening outside our country. Our stupidity is embarrassing. They are possibly the dumbest people on the planet," he told Britain's Mirror newspaper.

"That's why we're smiling all the time. You can see us coming down the street. You know, 'Hey! Hi! How's it going?' We've got that big [expletive deleted] grin on our face all the time because our brains aren't loaded down."

"We, the United States of America, are culpable in committing so many acts of terror and bloodshed that we had better get a clue about the culture of violence in which we have been active participants."

"The Iraqis who have risen up against the occupation are not 'insurgents' or 'terrorists' or 'The Enemy.' They are the Revolution, the Minutemen, and their numbers will grow and they will win.'"

---

BTW, had anybody heard about this movie: http://www.michaelmoorehatesamerica.com/

God help us when a man actually speaks out against his government or his people

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JaxSon

Here are a few of the reasons that I said Moore is an Un-American American:

Moore's movie nothing short of terrorism


BTW, had anybody heard about this movie: http://www.michaelmoorehatesamerica.com/

---

You can make anyone sound bad if you take them out of context. https://forums.windrivers.com/images.../2005/03/1.gif

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ya_know

The fact remains that Saddam failed to comply with inspection mandates constantly, and refused inspections time and time again. In the end, the whole world was surprised that Saddam didn't have WMD's...

To say that Bush was wrong because he should have know...well, let me reemphasize, it wasn't WMD's that put us at war with Iraq. It was an obstinate dictator, one with ties to terrorist groups, known to possess, use, construct, and seek WMD’s that put us on the war path, because when we insisted he comply…he wouldn’t. It's people like you that needed more justification, hence the arguments raged on about their presence, bottom line was, we needed proof he didn’t have them, and the only way we would ever get that proof was to invade, and shut down the régime, because that régime refused to bow down.

(boldface done by myself…)

---

So basically what this wordy response boils down to is that yes, the war WAS about WMDs?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wayward Clam

So basically what this wordy response boils down to is that yes, the war WAS about WMDs?

---

In a word, yes. Every piece of intelligence that money can buy was saying that he had them...had already used them in the past...and was trying to find ways to deliver them...and had threatened their neighbors and the U.S. We had to find out if this was all true. The U.N. wasn't going to do anything about it. They had already passed numerous sanctions, etc. against Iraq with threats of dire consequences. And saddam just thumbed his nose at everybody.

As a side benefit, the Iraqi people will now be able to decide their own fate.

Yes, many people have died as a result of this war but it is part of the overall war on terror. And, I would be proud to have my son serve over there. Nobody wants their son to die for any reason but this is justifiable. Please don't let anybody tell you differently.

Every one knew he had WMD's? Every one except the countries of the United Nations and the actual inspectors and their leader Hans Blix who kept saying we found nothing.
So thats about 5.5 Billion people.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ya_know

...you need to understand that this war was never truly about WMD's...

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wayward Clam

So basically what this wordy response boils down to is that yes, the war WAS about WMDs?

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JaxSon

In a word, yes.

---

Okay, I'm confus-ed now. :D

One thing I do understand... criticizing the state has been equated with terrorism... makes perfect sense to me! :p :butt:

Better watch out, if you beat their arguments they will call you un-American all because their talking heads told them to do so with the talking points put out by the so called "liberal" media

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Cleetus

God help us when a man actually speaks out against his government or his people

---

So (enter the paradox) god help us if the so called freedom of speech defenders like yourself don't reciprocate the same protection for notions that they defend simply for their own benefit, thus not extending that same protection to their adversaries rights.

In other words, what's good for the goose is good for the gander, so shut up.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ya_know

So (enter the paradox) god help us if the so called freedom of speech defenders like yourself don't reciprocate the same protection for notions that they defend simply for their own benefit, thus not extending that same protection to their adversaries rights.

In other words, what's good for the goose is good for the gander, so shut up.

---

Your cranky today, Ya-Know. I gotta admit defending freedom of speech by saying "Shut up" is an interesting notion.

I don't understand. You're angry at Americans who are militant patriots purely because it benefits themselves, and don't really care about the US population at large... and you SUPPORT George Bush??? :eek2:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by techs

Your cranky today, Ya-Know. I gotta admit defending freedom of speech by saying "Shut up" is an interesting notion.

---

Hence the paradox... :p

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wayward Clam

I don't understand. You're angry at Americans who are militant patriots purely because it benefits themselves, and don't really care about the US population at large... and you SUPPORT George Bush??? :eek2:

---

What???

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by techs

Your cranky today, Ya-Know. I gotta admit defending freedom of speech by saying "Shut up" is an interesting notion.

---

Just to clarify, because that thought of mine was rather complex, I wasn't defending freedom of speech at all. I was attacking Cleetus for trying to defend freedom of speech by saying that we shouldn't refute, or try to dispute with anything that that piece of crap non-patriot Moore tries to say. It's just as much my right to say he's a liar as it is for him to say that Bush is. I think that you would have to agree that both are true, even if you initially believe only one to be...the question is, as to what extent either of the two would go to perpetrate their lies...and which one is telling the truth at what time...that is the true quagmire, hence all of the recent discussions… :thumbs:

No, I am calling you guys un-American, hypocrits, and just generally rolling my eyes at your ideas that people can't talk out. Please do tell me once where I told you that you coldn't talk about it or refute me.

Hence phase 2 of the right, when the left starts defending freedoms, act like they are trying to squash your freedom to speak as loudly as you can making them look like the hypocrits first.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ya_know

So (enter the paradox) god help us if the so called freedom of speech defenders like yourself don't reciprocate the same protection for notions that they defend simply for their own benefit, thus not extending that same protection to their adversaries rights.

In other words, what's good for the goose is good for the gander, so shut up.

---

It's a good thing you explained what you were trying to say, because it sure enough wasn't making any sense! https://forums.windrivers.com/images.../2005/03/1.gif

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ya_know

...the question is, as to what extent either of the two would go to perpetrate their lies...

---

Well this is a pretty easy question to answer, it seems to me.

Let's look at this economically.

Michael Moore made what, $100 million + from Fahrenheit 911? And I seem to remember hearing somewhere that a lot of that is going to charity, although that could be just rumour, I haven't looked it up anywhere. I will certainly admit $100 million is a lot of money and could theoretically motivate anyone to lie to the public.

Bush gets paid $400 thousand a year, and his family gets $1.46 billion from the Saudi Arabians. Doesn't that give him 14 times as much incentive to lie about it as Moore has? Assuming that Moore keeps every penny?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Cleetus

No, I am calling you guys un-American, hypocrits, and just generally rolling my eyes at your ideas that people can't talk out. Please do tell me once where I told you that you coldn't talk about it or refute me.

Hence phase 2 of the right, when the left starts defending freedoms, act like they are trying to squash your freedom to speak as loudly as you can making them look like the hypocrits first.

---

Well, you are aren't you? We always end up down this path, someone speaks out, others say he's a turd and a liar, then the ones that support him say we are squashing his rights to speak out. You do it every time, it is you that is the hypocrite...trust me! :thumbs: It's my right too to say the things I do, so don't suppress me man! :p