PDA

View Full Version : Jones Backs Off. No Qu'ran Burning, Ever!



Gayle in MD
09-11-2010, 09:33 AM
I am thankful to learn that the radical RW Evangelical isn't going to follow through with his fame seeking, irresponsible threat!


We should all be thankful, since all of the commanders on the ground, stated that our own soldiers would be more at risk, if he performed such and act of hate.

G.

pooltchr
09-11-2010, 10:28 AM
Yes, all of our service members no longer need to worry about those crazy muslims wanting to hurt them!

Steve

Sid_Vicious
09-11-2010, 01:23 PM
The next group will surface to burn it. It's in our rights. Never has there not been a copy cat action, and this is perfect fodder for attention. It'll happen. Question is whether the feds have a set plan to kill off that right to be openly displayed, you know...break the constitution of the United States! Bush woulda, under a signing order.

Makes me really wonder what Jones really received under the table. Hell, this should be a feeding frenzy for all kinds of religious groups out there. sid

Gayle in MD
09-12-2010, 07:53 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Sid_Vicious</div><div class="ubbcode-body">The next group will surface to burn it. It's in our rights. Never has there not been a copy cat action, and this is perfect fodder for attention. It'll happen. Question is whether the feds have a set plan to kill off that right to be openly displayed, you know...break the constitution of the United States! Bush woulda, under a signing order.

Makes me really wonder what Jones really received under the table. Hell, this should be a feeding frenzy for all kinds of religious groups out there. sid </div></div>

Our right to freedom of speech has limits. Yelling "Fire" in a theater, is against the law, when there is no fire, for example.

It comes back to do we want to play into bin Laden's hands, and hurt our soldiers in the process, or do we want to prevent a radical, nutjob, religious fundamentalist, from making their plight even more dangerous.

Supporting hate, is for me, always the wrong path. Acting just like the enemy, without remaining commited to our American Principles, goes against our cause, and aids the enemy. We surely saw that under Bush's torture program.

Just my 2C., Martin.

G.

pooltchr
09-12-2010, 08:52 AM
did anybody notice that there were only two news organizations who said that they would absolutely NOT give any coverage to the book burning, if it had taken place?

They were the Associated Press and....are you ready....FOX News!

Steve

eg8r
09-12-2010, 06:37 PM
A friend of our family goes to school in Gainesville and a special forces friend of the family called her parents and told them to get her out of town. They had all kinds of people there undercover expecting the worst to happen. I am glad the pastor decided to change his mind.

eg8r

Qtec
09-12-2010, 08:22 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: pooltchr</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Yes, all of our service members no longer need to worry about those crazy muslims wanting to hurt them!<span style="color: #CC0000"> because some failed Preacher wanted his 15 minutes.</span>
Steve </div></div>

Q

Chopstick
09-13-2010, 06:41 AM
Personally, I thought boobquake was a much better idea.

Deeman3
09-13-2010, 08:51 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Gayle in MD</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Sid_Vicious</div><div class="ubbcode-body">The next group will surface to burn it. It's in our rights. Never has there not been a copy cat action, and this is perfect fodder for attention. It'll happen. Question is whether the feds have a set plan to kill off that right to be openly displayed, you know...break the constitution of the United States! Bush woulda, under a signing order.

Makes me really wonder what Jones really received under the table. Hell, this should be a feeding frenzy for all kinds of religious groups out there. sid </div></div>

Our right to freedom of speech has limits. Yelling "Fire" in a theater, is against the law, when there is no fire, for example.

It comes back to do we want to play into bin Laden's hands, and hurt our soldiers in the process, or do we want to prevent a radical, nutjob, religious fundamentalist, from making their plight even more dangerous.

Supporting hate, is for me, always the wrong path. Acting just like the enemy, without remaining commited to our American Principles, goes against our cause, and aids the enemy. We surely saw that under Bush's torture program.

Just my 2C., Martin.

G. </div></div>


<span style="color: #FF0000">I never thought this was good idea and quite stupid of the media to give it so much attention. However, it almost makes no difference as the crazy nuts aree still rioting over it and they will use anything or nothing to incite violence, like the Iman in NYC, just anything to inflame and kill themselves, their women and as many Americans as they can.

I watched the show My Trip to Al Queada" yestersay and is was very good. It ran for over an hour beofre they blamed Bush and the U.S. for the problems in the middle east. /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/smile.gif

However, it did make some very good points about the movement, it's origins, and it's lack of political goals beyond hate and destruction. I found it a worthwhile investment of my time. In the end, they either have to kill each other off or someone else will have to do it.

As I have said before, the one thing Obama is doing right is killing them in larger numbers than even Bush. It is only a temporary solution but it working well to keep most of them occupied until there is a more permanent solution. The show showed the almost hopeless challenge of these people ever being a part of the modern world.

</span>

Gayle in MD
09-13-2010, 09:39 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Deeman3</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Gayle in MD</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Sid_Vicious</div><div class="ubbcode-body">The next group will surface to burn it. It's in our rights. Never has there not been a copy cat action, and this is perfect fodder for attention. It'll happen. Question is whether the feds have a set plan to kill off that right to be openly displayed, you know...break the constitution of the United States! Bush woulda, under a signing order.

Makes me really wonder what Jones really received under the table. Hell, this should be a feeding frenzy for all kinds of religious groups out there. sid </div></div>

Our right to freedom of speech has limits. Yelling "Fire" in a theater, is against the law, when there is no fire, for example.

It comes back to do we want to play into bin Laden's hands, and hurt our soldiers in the process, or do we want to prevent a radical, nutjob, religious fundamentalist, from making their plight even more dangerous.

Supporting hate, is for me, always the wrong path. Acting just like the enemy, without remaining commited to our American Principles, goes against our cause, and aids the enemy. We surely saw that under Bush's torture program.

Just my 2C., Martin.

G. </div></div>


<span style="color: #FF0000">I never thought this was good idea and quite stupid of the media to give it so much attention. However, it almost makes no difference as the crazy nuts aree still rioting over it and they will use anything or nothing to incite violence, like the Iman in NYC, just anything to inflame and kill themselves, their women and as many Americans as they can.

I watched the show My Trip to Al Queada" yestersay and is was very good. It ran for over an hour beofre they blamed Bush and the U.S. for the problems in the middle east. /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/smile.gif

However, it did make some very good points about the movement, it's origins, and it's lack of political goals beyond hate and destruction. I found it a worthwhile investment of my time. In the end, they either have to kill each other off or someone else will have to do it.

As I have said before, the one thing Obama is doing right is killing them in larger numbers than even Bush. It is only a temporary solution but it working well to keep most of them occupied until there is a more permanent solution. The show showed the almost hopeless challenge of these people ever being a part of the modern world.

</span> </div></div>


As I have said many times, I am completely against land wars in the Middle East.

We have enough technology to use other methods, without boots on the ground.

IIRC, it was our own, Stealth Special Forces, which came the closest to getting bin Laden. The book, "Jawbreaker" tells the whole story. The Bush Administration refused to send in enough air support to back the effort. Was that just because Iraq was more important, or were those at the top, ever really serious about killing bin Laden?

I don't support just going out and killing Muslims, helter skelter, and I surely don't think that we have had good policies for addressing the massive issues in the Middle East, but one thing is for sure, if we were not dependent on foreign oil, if we had been the world leaders in addressing the fact that the world is running out of oil anyway, the policies which have lain at the foot of all of the hatred, and the growth of terrorist organizations, would have been greatly reduced, and perhaps, never have expanded to the problem we have now.

Through conservation methods, supported by government, instead of squelched by it, for p9olitical contributions, and in the interest of stock holders having infiltrated government as representatives, CEO profits, our of whack with their employees wages and benefits, along with American ingenuity, and more appreciation for our climate, health, and the sustainence of our planet, and it's inhabitants, things may have taken a very different path.

Ever watched, "Who Killed the Electric Car?"

As I have said all along, Neither Dems, nor Republicans, are without fault. Our country has only one shot at avoiding becoming much like a third world country, Public campaign financing, ONLY. No more buying politicians.

No group, has the power of wealthy corporate interests, and while they outsource our jobs, they bilk their own employees, who are working harder, and producing more, than ever before, for less money.

Our outsourced jobs, finance human misery all over the world, to boot.

We no long use economic power, to promote improving the human condition, we do busines with the worst of the worst, if our corporate CEO's can get MORE MORE MORE....

No economy can survive without a Middle Class, and a bunch of spoied rich, inheritance financed, lazy pigs, with no conscience, whose Da Da worked his butt off, and originally had an appreciation for America, like Sam Walton's kids, do not give a rats ass about America.

No unions, means no representation for the Middle Class grunts, who not only support the poor, but the wealthy, who don't pay taxes.


The inheritance taxes should be 100%.

Republicans are the worst of the two parties, in protecting the environment, in destroying the American econoomy, and in bilking the country, and stashing the money into their own bank accounts, and they are the least of all, held to accouont for their fraudulent actions.

Hence, we have had energy policies, which have expanded our threats. The Business men who build this country, were nothing like the spoiled offspring who inherited their massive wealth.



G.

Deeman3
09-13-2010, 10:44 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Gayle in MD</div><div class="ubbcode-body">

The inheritance taxes should be 100%.


G.
[/b] </div></div>

<span style="color: #FF0000">Great, that way my family farm will go straight to Obama! No more reason to pretend we don't have a socialist system, just give it all over to Uncle Sam and we know Nancy and he will turn it all over to the more deserving folks, their voters. /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/frown.gif You have pretty much hit the Democrats long term strategy on the head. </span>

Gayle in MD
09-13-2010, 11:27 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Deeman3</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Gayle in MD</div><div class="ubbcode-body">

The inheritance taxes should be 100%.


G.
[/b] </div></div>

<span style="color: #FF0000">Great, that way my family farm will go straight to Obama! No more reason to pretend we don't have a socialist system, just give it all over to Uncle Sam and we know Nancy and he will turn it all over to the more deserving folks, their voters. /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/frown.gif You have pretty much hit the Democrats long term strategy on the head. </span> </div></div>

Well now, just think about how fast we'd pay off that nasty deficit, LMAO!

Hey, you guys are the ones always saying there's no difference between the two parties, aren't you?

Do you really think they are going to stop spending, either party?

Course, you guys don't differentiate between spending to divert a Depression, and spending just for the benefit of corporate cronies, Golf Trips, prostitutes, and yachts, but if you think the top 1 percent in this country is paying their taxes...well, lets just let another Republican say it for us....

The queen of mean, before Palin came along and stole the title...


"Only the little people pay taxes"

If the inheritance taxes are not raised, we will be a third world country, with only the top one percent running it, uh oh...they already do.

Explain to me Deeman, why we have the vast difference, the huge growth in the void, dollar for dollar, between the CEO salaries of today, and employees, and those of the forties, fifties and early sixties,....you know the stats, I'm sure.

Now how is that justified????? No society can surviive without a Middle Class. Show me one! Top one perdcent owns ninety percent of the wealth. Know what that's called?

Then on top of it, they're trashing the environment, killing the earth, and not even paying taxes on their inheritance?

Phaleeeze!

The wealthy have us headed to being a third world country, sick, dying and no health care.


G.

Gayle in MD
09-13-2010, 12:41 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Deeman3</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Gayle in MD</div><div class="ubbcode-body">

The inheritance taxes should be 100%.


G.
[/b] </div></div>

<span style="color: #FF0000">Great, that way my family farm will go straight to Obama! No more reason to pretend we don't have a socialist system, just give it all over to Uncle Sam and we know Nancy and he will turn it all over to the more deserving folks, their voters. /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/frown.gif You have pretty much hit the Democrats long term strategy on the head. </span> </div></div>


It is no accident that pollution is worse, unions were destroyed, we're seeeing more burried miners, more oil spills, more CEO's stealing money and getting off scott free for bilking the country, and the vast chasm between CEO's vastly growing wealth, are so much greater than the wages of the very employees who worked their tails off for higher productivity.

Corporations enjoying higher profit margins, CEo's getting huge bonuses, from higher American worker productivity, but employees are getting screwed royallyl, both in benefits, and in their pay. Not to mention a more unsafe work environment.

The whole issue here is how come the benefits of growth have adhered almost entirely to one tiny set of people.


Do huge tax cuts to Sam Walton's heirs, who haven't necessarily done anything except choose their parents well, rob the government of the ability to build infrastructure that benefits us all?

The irony is that the entrepreneurs who buildt this country, like Walton are more often than not more obsessed with building a business than making money. It's their heirs (the American equivalent of landed gentry) and the financial, political and legal types that live off of them that care about the money.

Has the "Christian Coalition" or their beloved god spewing Republicans, ever heard of "The love of money is the root of all evil."

It's always been interesting to me the many corporate giants of modern America (HP, IBM, Boeing among others) expanded and prospered when the marginal income tax rate was over 70 per cent. According to accepted Libertarian and right wing theology, this should have been impossible.

The point here is that it's labor (the employees) who made the productivity gains over the last three decades. Somehow those gains haven't been shared with the employees. it's immoral, is this what you guys call trickle down. How many of those homeowners who got sick, or turned to credit, would have done so if they had a share of the pie.

There is a link between what happening around us, and corporate greed, and the destruction of American worker's unions.

Your post a while back...about health insurance costs? Why aren't some of these multi billion dollar CEO's at the top, adding enough money to cover it, when their workers worked harder and created those higher profits?

Why should employees be out there working their butts off, so that the CEO's can rack in more personal financial gains, and continue to have such an uneven share of profits, and huge bonuses, even when they commit fraud?

The wealthy are destroying this country, with their own greed, the greatest help in doing so, coming from Republicans, and particularly, BUSH AND REAGAN! AMNESTY! Give me a break!


This country was doing fine, when we had unions to protect workers.

How many more dead employees are we seeing? Catestrophic events, due to bottom line only business philsophies?

De-regulation friendly Republicans make me sick. The American Middle Class is getting it from all sides. The right bought into that trickle down BS, and they're ignorant, and stupid, to fail to see the big picture.


G.

Deeman3
09-13-2010, 02:39 PM
Looks like even Castro is not buying into your plan any more! Listen, if Obama didn't want to rescue or buy off the failed CEO's during the financial crisis how can you gripe about the levels of compensation they receive? I don't defend these salaries as mine is roughly equilivent to those in the 1950's in relationship to my employees. If you want a Cuban type communism, then go for it. Thieft by taxation os the same as steeling by rigging the market and both should be prosecuted.

The country was doing fine when we had the unions to protect workers? Do you not remember the corruption in the unions? Now that they have bankrupted the big three, you want them back in the game?

Listen, we did vote for socialism in the last election. If people still want that, there is little the working class can do. I have been to Russia a few times but that is the model and I don't think most working Americans will like the result that much. The welfare class may but that is what you get when the receivers outpopulate the workers in elections.

Taxpayers! When Obama gets a majority of his cabinet that actually paid their taxes, I'll listen to him on who should pay how much.



HAVANA Cuba will let more than 500,000 state employees go by next March and try to move most to non-state jobs in the biggest shift to the private sector since the 1960s, the official Cuban labor federation said Monday.

The layoffs will start immediately and run through the first half of next year, according to an announcement Monday by the nearly 3 million-strong Cuban Workers Confederation the only labor union the government tolerates.

The statement said eventually more than a million jobs would be cut and, due to efforts to increase efficiency in the state sector, there would be few new state sector openings.

More than 85 percent of the Cuban labor force, or over 5 million people, worked for the state at the close of 2009, according to the government.

"Our state cannot and should not continue maintaining companies, productive entities, services and budgeted sectors with bloated payrolls (and) losses that hurt the economy," the statement said.


"Job options will be increased and broadened with new forms of non-state employment, among them leasing land, cooperatives and self-employment, absorbing hundreds of thousands of workers in the coming years," it said.

Gayle in MD
09-13-2010, 05:31 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Deeman3</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Looks like even Castro is not buying into your plan any more! Listen, if Obama didn't want to rescue or buy off the failed CEO's during the financial crisis how can you gripe about the levels of compensation they receive? I don't defend these salaries as mine is roughly equilivent to those in the 1950's in relationship to my employees. If you want a Cuban type communism, then go for it. Thieft by taxation os the same as steeling by rigging the market and both should be prosecuted.

The country was doing fine when we had the unions to protect workers? Do you not remember the corruption in the unions? Now that they have bankrupted the big three, you want them back in the game?

Listen, we did vote for socialism in the last election. If people still want that, there is little the working class can do. I have been to Russia a few times but that is the model and I don't think most working Americans will like the result that much. The welfare class may but that is what you get when the receivers outpopulate the workers in elections.

Taxpayers! When Obama gets a majority of his cabinet that actually paid their taxes, I'll listen to him on who should pay how much.



HAVANA Cuba will let more than 500,000 state employees go by next March and try to move most to non-state jobs in the biggest shift to the private sector since the 1960s, the official Cuban labor federation said Monday.

The layoffs will start immediately and run through the first half of next year, according to an announcement Monday by the nearly 3 million-strong Cuban Workers Confederation the only labor union the government tolerates.

The statement said eventually more than a million jobs would be cut and, due to efforts to increase efficiency in the state sector, there would be few new state sector openings.

More than 85 percent of the Cuban labor force, or over 5 million people, worked for the state at the close of 2009, according to the government.

"Our state cannot and should not continue maintaining companies, productive entities, services and budgeted sectors with bloated payrolls (and) losses that hurt the economy," the statement said.


"Job options will be increased and broadened with new forms of non-state employment, among them leasing land, cooperatives and self-employment, absorbing hundreds of thousands of workers in the coming years," it said.
</div></div>

IMO, you are inflating Union corruption, there is some corruption in every enterprise.

Also, you are mixing temporary recessionary tactics, with status quo, legislating.

Again, "Under the conditions prevailing" in order to avoid Bush's depression, we must spend money to help our citizens, get through the results of Bush's failed economy.


Greenspan said it would be incredibly irresponsible to continue the Bush tax cuts for the wealthy.

Most economists say we didn't spend enough on the stimulus, and Republicans promised to filibuster spending any more.

Republicans have consistantly blocked every effort by the president, to work together to solve our problems.

Even appointees, have been blocked, where there were no credible issues involved in their competance.

The Health care bill, would have been a far better bill, with the public option. Repubicans vowed to filibuster if it was included.

By the end, they had been whining for eight months about a 2,000 page document, and wanted to throw it all out, and start the whole thing over.

This, after refusing to work together for it at all, for months.

Clear Obstructionism, of the worst kind.

Clue, no representative read every bill. Their staff reads the bill. Do you know how many people are on those staffs????


It wasn't perfect, but it was a start, and at least, it closed the doughnut hole, phased to be more affordable, as other legislation for addressing the deficit wa enacted.

At Least, HC insurance companies, couldn't deny insurance to those with pre-existing conditions.

At Least it provided that they couldn't drop you, right when you needed insurance the most.


I addressed earlier on the forum, the turn coats in the Democratic party, but when one looks at where they were from, one can only see again, the bad results of so called, "conservative" thinking, they were all trying to please their ignorant constituants, who are the fox news junkies of the country, and the pressure from their illogical expectations on spending, in the midst of a deep recession, crippled many legislative efforts for a more effective bill..

G.

Stretch
09-14-2010, 02:30 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Gayle in MD</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Deeman3</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Gayle in MD</div><div class="ubbcode-body">

The inheritance taxes should be 100%.


G.
[/b] </div></div>

<span style="color: #FF0000">Great, that way my family farm will go straight to Obama! No more reason to pretend we don't have a socialist system, just give it all over to Uncle Sam and we know Nancy and he will turn it all over to the more deserving folks, their voters. /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/frown.gif You have pretty much hit the Democrats long term strategy on the head. </span> </div></div>

Well now, just think about how fast we'd pay off that nasty deficit, LMAO!

Hey, you guys are the ones always saying there's no difference between the two parties, aren't you?

Do you really think they are going to stop spending, either party?

Course, you guys don't differentiate between spending to divert a Depression, and spending just for the benefit of corporate cronies, Golf Trips, prostitutes, and yachts, but if you think the top 1 percent in this country is paying their taxes...well, lets just let another Republican say it for us....

The queen of mean, before Palin came along and stole the title...


"Only the little people pay taxes"

If the inheritance taxes are not raised, we will be a third world country, with only the top one percent running it, uh oh...they already do.

Explain to me Deeman, why we have the vast difference, the huge growth in the void, dollar for dollar, between the CEO salaries of today, and employees, and those of the forties, fifties and early sixties,....you know the stats, I'm sure.

Now how is that justified????? No society can surviive without a Middle Class. Show me one! Top one perdcent owns ninety percent of the wealth. Know what that's called?

Then on top of it, they're trashing the environment, killing the earth, and not even paying taxes on their inheritance?

Phaleeeze!

The wealthy have us headed to being a third world country, sick, dying and no health care.


G. </div></div>

That's the biggest flaw in runnaway Capitalism. Where money is conserned, fairness has no place. St.

Gayle in MD
09-14-2010, 07:01 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Federally Funded Elections will solve the problem and return Democracy to America. No politician would be beholden to any "election campaign donors". There wouldn't be any.

We voters can advocate a tax payer funded election system and exclude private political donations of any kind. No money from corporations, unions, PACs, churches, or Lobbyists may enter the political arena. Politicians would therefore be working for US. Lobbyists would have no extraordinary power over our political process.

All political parties should be funded equally. The result will be more political parties with perhaps better and more diverse ideas would have a voice and the individual voter would have more choice.

The Gov. could pay public television, and radio, to provide equal time for campaigning, without all of the shock jock propaganda added to the fray.

I never watch important political events on commercial stations, only on C-span, as it is.

Public financed elections is the only way to accomplish equal power in the voting booth, for the common man, and remove corruption from our political system, the bonus would be that we'd have representatives who go into politics to serve the public's needs, rather than their own financial opportunities. Our representavies would no longer be paawns for corporations to steal our tax dollars and use them to escape and accountability for what they do, particularly by trashing of our environment, making us ill, and then preventing an equal opportunity for health care in our country.

What we have right now is nothing more than Facism, and grand collusion between the government, and corporate influence.

G.

</div></div>

pooltchr
09-14-2010, 08:43 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Gayle in MD</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
All political parties should be funded equally. The result will be more political parties with perhaps better and more diverse ideas would have a voice and the individual voter would have more choice.

] </div></div>

So you would have your tax dollars going to Republicans, Democrats, Tea Party, Green Party, the Dog party, the Steve party, etc?
Where do you draw the line?
How many parties are you willing to fund?
The Steve party gets the same funding as the Democrats? Cool.
Just go ahead and mail your check directly to me!

It can't work.

Steve

LWW
09-14-2010, 04:38 PM
Does anyone remember which 2008 candidate pledged to only accept federal funding and then reneged ... taking many numerous donations from Arab syayes?

Here's a hint ... G gave them an absolute pass on it.

LWW

pooltchr
09-14-2010, 09:51 PM
But that was ok because it was Obama, so all is forgiven.

Steve

Gayle in MD
09-15-2010, 05:27 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Deeman3</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Gayle in MD</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Sid_Vicious</div><div class="ubbcode-body">The next group will surface to burn it. It's in our rights. Never has there not been a copy cat action, and this is perfect fodder for attention. It'll happen. Question is whether the feds have a set plan to kill off that right to be openly displayed, you know...break the constitution of the United States! Bush woulda, under a signing order.

Makes me really wonder what Jones really received under the table. Hell, this should be a feeding frenzy for all kinds of religious groups out there. sid </div></div>

Our right to freedom of speech has limits. Yelling "Fire" in a theater, is against the law, when there is no fire, for example.

It comes back to do we want to play into bin Laden's hands, and hurt our soldiers in the process, or do we want to prevent a radical, nutjob, religious fundamentalist, from making their plight even more dangerous.

Supporting hate, is for me, always the wrong path. Acting just like the enemy, without remaining commited to our American Principles, goes against our cause, and aids the enemy. We surely saw that under Bush's torture program.

Just my 2C., Martin.

G. </div></div>


<span style="color: #FF0000">I never thought this was good idea and quite stupid of the media to give it so much attention. However, it almost makes no difference as the crazy nuts aree still rioting over it and they will use anything or nothing to incite violence, like the Iman in NYC, just anything to inflame and kill themselves, their women and as many Americans as they can.

I watched the show My Trip to Al Queada" yestersay and is was very good. It ran for over an hour beofre they blamed Bush and the U.S. for the problems in the middle east. /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/smile.gif

However, it did make some very good points about the movement, it's origins, and it's lack of political goals beyond hate and destruction. I found it a worthwhile investment of my time. In the end, they either have to kill each other off or someone else will have to do it.

As I have said before, the one thing Obama is doing right is killing them in larger numbers than even Bush. It is only a temporary solution but it working well to keep most of them occupied until there is a more permanent solution. The show showed the almost hopeless challenge of these people ever being a part of the modern world.

</span> </div></div>


In the end, they either have to kill each other off or someone else will have to do it.

<span style='font-size: 14pt'>As was made perfectly clear, in the documentary, they don't care about dying, Deeman, and there are over a billion Muslims in the world, 1.2 billion. Do you think we're ever going to kill off all of them? </span>

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">As I have said before, the one thing Obama is doing right is killing them in larger numbers than even Bush. It is only a temporary solution but it working well to keep most of them occupied until there is a more permanent solution. The show showed the almost hopeless challenge of these people ever being a part of the modern world.
</div></div>
<span style='font-size: 14pt'>How can you possibly think that any of
Bush's franchised al alQeda groups, have been too distracted to kill people, because of anything that is going on, or has been going on, in Iraq, or Afghanistan?

Terrorist attacks have increased all over the world since bush Innvaded Iraq, and attempts here, have increased as well.

The wars in the Middle East, are greatly responsbily for our current economic problems..and will have an impact for decades. As long as Americans are dying in the Middle East, bin Laden, and al Qaeda, are happy, annd they will further expand their cause and their influence upon the desperate,and depressed, poor youth of the region.

We do business with the worst of the worst over there. That mistake, going all the way back to Reagan, has been not only costly, but a disgrace.

Who is the worst over there? The Saudis, the Egyptians, the Iraqis, Iran, take your pick, if we hadn'tremained dependent on their oil, things would be very different. As it is right now, everytime the economy and the stock market improves a bit, OPEC goes up on their oil. Look at what happened to the prices during Bush's regime.

It is possible that no matter how much money the repubs give to American Oil corporations, they don't build any new refineries because they like it when wars are raging, and oil goes through the roof, and they get more profits for less outlay?

All of those arms and training for our flavor of the day, tribe, in Afghanistan, during Reagan, to thwart the Russians, were wasted, the Russionas weren't going to win over there anyway, and now all that wasted American money, weapons, and the training, is now now helping in the killing of American troops. For what? It's killing our economy, too.

What did we, the American people, not Halliburton, "Win" in Iraq?

No matter how many Muslims die in those wars, another 9/11, only takes another 19 of them, ready to die. As you saw in the movie, the radical terrorists, the desperate, depressed oppressed, youth, easy pickin's for al Qaeda, consider dying an honor.

G.</span>

LWW
09-15-2010, 06:20 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Gayle in MD</div><div class="ubbcode-body">We do business with the worst of the worst over there. That mistake, going all the way back to Reagan, has been not only costly, but a disgrace.

G.

</div></div>

Absolute rubbish.

1 - The US involvement in Aghanistan began under the Imam Carter regime.

2 - The Afghans that the US backed were the group which later became the Northern Alliance.

3 - The group which became the Taliban was simply a front group for the wealthy Arabs who came in to fight the soviets.

4 - The NA was always arch enemies of the Taliban and the group they disdainfully referred to as "THE ARABS" who were fighting for a sharia law caliphate.

5 - The arms killing US soldiers are leftover Russian junk and arms supplied by the Islamic Republic of Iran.

6 - The Islamic Republic of Iran would never exist had the Imam Carter regime not backstabbed the most loyal US ally in the region, the Shah of Iran.

7 - Imam Carter forced the Pahlavi regime to allow the Ayatollah Khomeini back into Iran, referring to him as "AN ISLAMIC GANDHI" in one of his presidential fatwas. thus creating the current middle east mess.

8 - Every POTUS from Reagan through Bush II has tried to rectify the mess they inherited from the Imam Carter regime.

9 - All of this will sail high over the heads of the Obamanation being that it wasn't spoon delivered by the party.

TRUTH VS TRUTHINESS!

LWW