London bombing

Status
Not open for further replies.
I think I'd have to be smoking crack to believe the gibberish in that link above.

/forum/images/graemlins/smilie_barf.gif
 
TreeDr,

I'm not saying that I'm "for" them, all I'm saying is I can't unequivocally say I'm "against" them. I don't know any more about them or what they claim to do or not do beyond what I'm told by my government and/or the mainstream press.

Whenever I consider both the information I've been fed, and equally (or more!) believable counterpoints, I feel it's better for me to err on the side of caution.

How many of our good people were needlessly lost while on what was essentially a vacation in the Sandwich Islands in December, 1942? [edit: oops! make that '41]

Do you honestly believe that Lee Harvey Oswald pulled off that feat with a $30 bolt action war surplus rifle firing magic bullets that defy the laws of physics?

How many of our good people were maimed or killed, not to mention the locals who suffered the same fate or at the least had their lives completely upended as a result of the Gulf of Tonkin non-incident?

Why didn't we finish the job during Desert Storm, instead of having to go back ten years later (if we really had to go over there in the first place)?

Not to say that McVeigh wasn't a patsy who might have actually believed he'd done all that damage himself with an anfo bomb, but since when does such an inefficient device have the ability to form a crater and shear steel structural members while not having a proportionately similar effect on nearby structures? And why in that, and subsequent similar (though on a far grander scale) situations, is the evidence quickly destroyed before an impartial investigation can be performed?

Why does the IRS need to lose one of their best criminal investigators because they refuse to answer pointed questions about their misapplication of the law, and get their asses kicked in court when they instead bring him up on criminal charges?

(Just a few major general points to consider in order to help see where I'm coming from on this.)

I don't intend to belittle the efforts to protect themselves of the individuals who find themselves in harms way for whatever reason (though I do disagree that they're over there fighting for our freedom -- we've in indisputable fact lost a great deal of freedom concurrent with their deployment), and I previously stated unequivocally that I don't believe each and every government/press individual to be evil. (Not that I need to, but I know this to be in part true first-hand as I've got near kin who are or have been in law enforcement and/or government and/or armed services at various levels.)

I wholly believe that when a bully continually pushes a weakling, the bully should not be surprised if/when the weakling reacts in "non-conventional" ways. Sure, these "terrorists", whoever they may be, aren't "fighting fair". What do you expect? Did the British think we Americans were fighting fair when we wouldn't line up against them in the open field but instead used trees for cover? To them, we were approaching "terrorist" behavior while we were in the process of defending the formation of our own country/government.

I'm not defending or trying to justify the actions of whomever is doing these bombings, make no mistake about that. But I do hope you'd be able to leave even the teensiest amount of room for trying to see things from their (again, whomever they may really be) point of view and their resultant desperation.

To my admittedly limited knowledge, this is the best place to live in the world, and I'm more than happy to have the good fortune of being born here. That doesn't mean I don't love it when I question things that go on here. In fact, I feel that not questioning them would indicate both complacency and my non-love of it! Would you, given the choice, prefer your children to love you because you're you in/for all your particular aspects, or rather have them love you "just because" and regardless? To me, the former means a bit more, and it both requires greater responsibility/accountability on your part and is a win/win situation.

Regarding the current event, would you or would you not agree that this is a fair assessment?

Glen
 
I could not stomach your last post and to be honest, I don't have the attention span to read the whole thing.

People should be warned of people like yourself.

I think you are taking the whole granola/Berkenstock/Kerry/Edwards thinking to a point where you are a threat to society.

Are you drunk or ON something?
 
While I really do not question that al Qaeda is an evil terrorist organization that should be obliterated, Glen has good cause to question the news reports-governments and reporters sometimes distort, lie and just plain make stuff up. As far as Glen being leftist......You are trying to stuff him in the wrong pigeonhole.-It would be more accurate to say that Glen is so far right that you can go left and get to him about as fast, but the whole left and right thing only serves to label people. It is better to listen to what people say and decide if you agree or disagree. Sometimes "leftists" say sensible things and sometimes a rightwinger is just an idiot.(But if you want to label me -I'm so far right that I consider the John Birch Society decent folk but a bit too far left. /forum/images/graemlins/wink.gif
 
I think (as a humanist) that we should respest someone elses religion.
Think of what the Cristians have done in the middle ages. I bet there were whole continents that thought "Death to Cristianity"

Keep the respect up for one other. It's the rotten apples that drive us apart.

Wolter
 
I don't believe a thing the media says after I did a tour in Bosnia. When nothing was happening in our area, my parents were besides themselves watching the news about the horrors going on. When the sh!& was hitting the fan, there was no coverage on the news.

Don't fault Glen for questioning propaganda

Islam has a long way to go before they murder half the innocent people christianity has over the centuries!!! But that's ok, I don't think it makes you christians bad people, certainly not deserving of death.

Dave
 
"Witches" were burned in Salem in 1692 for not being christian, that is less than 1000 years ago, by your recconing, that still gives muslims about 200 years to catch up.

IRA bomings were done under the guise of religion, Bosnia was 3 side divided by religion.

Religion kills people every day in different parts of the world. Not all of it Muslim, they just get the most propaganda (sorry, I mean media coverage)

It is all up to the person reading to interpret the Koran or the Bible. If you took the bible too seriously then you would have to stone to death people who worked on Sunday or took the lord's name in vain.

Dave
 
[ QUOTE ]


And that is EXACTLY their mindset!

[/ QUOTE ]

So who are "they"? All muslims? I know a few muslims who practice Islam. They do not want to convert me or kill me in the name of allah. They were shocked and embarassed by 9-11 and the other terrorist acts done in the name of their religion. I do not feel like killing them either. There are lots of nasty / ignorant people in all religions. Your stereotipical comments against muslims would only reinforce stereotypes about Americans if I believed in that sort of thing.

Dave
 
Well Gayle, my wife is a traditional Cherokee. The blood oath taken on land sales to Americans is still valid.

During the round-up, the stockades, and the march west 4,000 died including her Great great great Grandmother. That's still below the deaths of 9/11 so I guess they should start killing white Americans and be justified in doing so.

That's "gloves off" Master, I understand your anger...many of my good friends were killed by inept leadership and purposeful meandering by white christian politicians but I refrain from pennance, only by pen or self defense. In the end, like Japan or Germany, we'll be told to love them and trade freely.

The Cajun, Irish, miners, farmers, Pullmen workers, cops, Bonus Army veterans, even Vietnam vets of my order were all labelled "terrorist" by an opposing force at one time. Even our own revolutionaries but that's a term the White House would rather you forget. Founding Fathers is not as appropriate for me. We're built on bloodshed, and we'll die from it.

Besides, when we want "retribution", we believe our leadership will accord those wishes. All we've seen so far is situation AFU and it's bringing on more of the same...like the little big man said a couple years ago..."Bring it on". And they are.

WE ain't seen nothing yet.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

New threads New posts

Back
Top Bottom