Al qaeda is happy too! (3 Viewers)

[Spicoli]

Reb,

To clear the air regarding my "Well done my fellow Americans" comment. I was trying to point out that "our" enemy has been emboldened, and sees us as a weak foe with our anti-war movement and the recent results of Tuesday's elections.

They will now walk around with their chest puffed out, and continue their rampage. I was simply pointing out that we have empowered "our" enemy, and we need to learn from our mistakes.

In no way was I implying that Democrats are "pro-terrorist." Where do you come up with this stuff?

 

[DadsDream]

I went to feed my horses an hour ago and don't feel like reading two pages of stuff. So, did I miss anything? :sneakup:

 

[RebSaint]

Reb,

To clear the air regarding my "Well done my fellow Americans" comment. I was trying to point out that "our" enemy has been emboldened, and sees us as a weak foe with our anti-war movement and the recent results of Tuesday's elections.

They will now walk around with their chest puffed out, and continue their rampage. I was simply pointing out that we have empowered "our" enemy, and we need to learn from our mistakes.

In no way was I implying that Democrats are "pro-terrorist." Where do you come up with this stuff?

Why don't you just come out and say it, rather than deny it.

It's disingenuous.

You claim the enemy is "emboldened" and sees us as "a weak foe because of the anti-war movement" When clearly the Democrats won because they'll most likely get us out of Iraq sooner.

Translation: Vote Republican in the future to not embolden, but to weaken the enemy. You claim the enemies of America were strengthened by voting Democrat. Therefore, it stands to reason that this country should have voted R. If I'm against the terrorists, I don't want to vote D and embolden our enemies.

Don't take me for a fool. There's no air to clear. I, and most every other poster know what you said. And you said it again rather subtly in your post.

And it still remains what I labeled it from the get-go: Partisan psychobabble.

 

[Shawn]

In no way was I implying that Democrats are "pro-terrorist." Where do you come up with this stuff?

From what you wrote.

And besides, your original point was a poor one. You think they were emboldened--as opposed to what? The way they were withering before the elections? They were already emboldened, and had been increasingly so over the past year.

Had the elections gone differently, do you think they would have conceded? Or expressed concern and reservations? Maybe some remorse?

Completely ridiculous.

And who cares what they say anyway? We are in bad shape if we make decisions of any kind based upon what they say publicly--and besides, who is the spokesman for these guys? Do they have some contact information? Any way I can get on their mailing list so they can fax me copies of their weekly press statements?

 

[DadsDream]

--and besides, who is the spokesman for these guys? Do they have some contact information? Any way I can get on their mailing list so they can fax me copies of their weekly press statements?

 

[Saint by the Bay]

These guys blow themselves up for their cause on a daily basis. How much more "bold" can you get?

 

[Shawn]

That's cute and funny and everything, but it's not true. They might be a conduit, but they aren't spokesmen for them, any more than Fox News is a spokesman for President Bush.

 

[Saint by the Bay]

...any more than Fox News is a spokesman for President Bush.

They aren't? :dunno:

 

[DadsDream]

That's cute and funny and everything, but it's not true. They might be a conduit, but they aren't spokesmen for them, any more than Fox News is a spokesman for President Bush.

JUBA online
Baghdad sniper personal blog
http://juba-online.blogspot.com/

 

[Dave]

Someone posts a news story that was written by the Associated Press(not Fox News) and picked up by every major news outlet and some call him a troll and say "it's meaningless political, partisan psychobabble from people who simply want to have discussions which involve talking points and demegoguery." Is Spicoli not allowed to post a news story that is being carried by all of the major news outlets and add his own comment? Why start off by attacking the person instead of addressing how you feel about the actual article. You have every right to disagree with his comment, but why is the reaction by some people to attack him personally by automatically calling him a partisan or accuse him of using talking points? It looks like some people are upset with the article, but decide to take it out on Spicoli. I do not think the Democrats are pro-terrorist, but are we supposed to ignore Al Queda, Iran and other Muslims celebrating the results from the midterm elections?<SCRIPT type=text/javascript> vbmenu_register("postmenu_30900", true); </SCRIPT>

 

[Dave]

That's cute and funny and everything, but it's not true. They might be a conduit, but they aren't spokesmen for them, any more than Fox News is a spokesman for President Bush.

Fox News is the spokesman for Bush while CNN, MSNBC, ABC, NBC, CBS and the majority of newspapers are mouthpieces for the Democrats.

 

[Inkspot47]

Someone posts a news story that was written by the Associated Press(not Fox News) and picked up by every major news outlet and some call him a troll and say "it's meaningless political, partisan psychobabble from people who simply want to have discussions which involve talking points and demegoguery." Is Spicoli not allowed to post a news story that is being carried by all of the major news outlets and add his own comment? Why start off by attacking the person instead of addressing how you feel about the actual article. You have every right to disagree with his comment, but why is the reaction by some people to attack him personally by automatically calling him a partisan or accuse him of using talking points? It looks like some people are upset with the article, but decide to take it out on Spicoli. I do not think the Democrats are pro-terrorist, but are we supposed to ignore Al Queda, Iran and other Muslims celebrating the results from the midterm elections?<SCRIPT type=text/javascript> vbmenu_register("postmenu_30900", true); </SCRIPT>

Are you OK Dave? There are no links in your post.

 

[Dave]

Are you OK Dave? There are no links in your post.

LOL, check the MSNBC Bush impeachment thread. I was able to reach my 1 article quota for today with that link.

 

[Shawn]

Fox News is the spokesman for Bush while CNN, MSNBC, ABC, NBC, CBS and the majority of newspapers are mouthpieces for the Democrats.

Depends how far right you are.

I'm sure Hitler would have thought Reagan was a hippie.

But that wasn't my point, as you well know. None are official spokesmen for anybody.

 

[saintanism]

I'm so sick of this war. If Rummy hadn't screwed things up so bad we could have already been home by now. Since President Bush has nothing to lose, politically speaking, maybe he should just drop a neutron bomb on the entire mid-east and get this over with once and for all? If he utilizes the Neutron Bomb we can still save all the structures...Oh yeah, and the oil too. A little too right wing perhaps? No? :hehehmn: