‘Cultural left responsible for 9/11.’
By on Jan 16th, 2007 at 4:02 pm
‘Cultural left responsible for 9/11.’
Prominent conservative intellectual Dinesh D’Souza is releasing a book today titled, “The Enemy at Home: The Cultural Left and Its Responsibility for 9/11.” D’Souza is a fellow at the Hoover Institute, and formerly served at the American Enterprise Institute. Despite the book’s inflammatory thesis, D’Souza suggests that the book “avoids much of the strident rhetoric seen in other ‘liberal-bashing’ books.”
View Most Popular
Advertisement
What We're About
What We're Fighting For
What We're Fighting Against
Featured
Subscribe to the Progress Report
Topic CloudView topics sorted by popularity
Afghanistan
Bachmann
Beck
Boehner
Bush
Cheney
Civil Rights
Congress
Corporate Ethics
Dobbs
Economy
Election
Energy
Environment
Ethics
Fox News
Gingrich
Global Warming
Hannity
Health Care
Immigration
International Relations
Iraq
Justice
Kristol
LGBT
Lieberman
Limbaugh
Maddow
McCain
Media
Military
Obama
Palin
Pelosi
Public Plan
Race
Radical Right
Religion
Sports
Steele
Stimulus
Tea Parties
Technology
Women's Rights
Visit Our Affiliated Sites
Reports
In-depth studies on select topics
Got a hot tip?
Have a hot news tip? We'd love to hear from you. Use the form below to send us the latest.
ArchivesBlog Roll
Spin City!
Now we’re supposed to believe some bottom feeder who worked at the American Enterprise Institute? Gee, that’s reputable!
Look, assclown, your reputation precedes you with Fred Kagan’s inane take on the ’splurge’. Losers, the lot of ‘ya!
January 16th, 2007 at 4:06 pmHas anyone written “The Enemy in the White House” yet?
January 16th, 2007 at 4:08 pmSo D’Souza is basically siding with bin Laden.
January 16th, 2007 at 4:08 pmHahahahahahaha. Who published this piece of garbage?
January 16th, 2007 at 4:08 pmIf D’Souza wants a prime example of modern western decline, he doesn’t have to look any farther than the Fox network– the farthest thing from the cultural left there is.
January 16th, 2007 at 4:11 pmLet’s have real discussion about who’s responsible for 9/11 and the neocon agenda which led up to it, why don’t we? Besides, the “official story” is so contradictory that it leaves americans with tremendous suspicion about what this administration knew, when, and how they may have been complicit in it. For starters, for someone who purportedly did not know that we were under attack, to sit in a classroom reading “My Pet Goat” to students without any facial expression or desire to move (even though it could have meant that his own life could be in danger) leaves much suspicion….he didn’t even raise an eyebrow, frankly. This lack of reaction is quite telling……and what about the “war games” which we now know were occurring precisely when the attacks occurred? NORAD didn’t shoot down the planes because they couldn’t tell the real ones from the “war game dummies” on the radar screen…..oh yes, someone’s responsible for 9/11 and it’s certainly NOT the “cultural left”, that’s for sure!
January 16th, 2007 at 4:11 pmProminent conservative intellectual Dinesh D’Souza
theres something wrong with this line…
January 16th, 2007 at 4:11 pm#2 No one has written “The Enemy in the White House” yet but they have written one similar entitled “Snakes in the White House”…..because that’s more apt.
January 16th, 2007 at 4:12 pmSo, D’Souza, if you hate America so much, please leave. I’m sure you can find an empty cave somewhere near the Afghanistan/Pakistan border.
January 16th, 2007 at 4:13 pmOhhh. I love being blamed for 9/11. Again. If anyone blamed 9/11 on me to my face, I’d kick them where it hurts.
January 16th, 2007 at 4:13 pm#5 is the Fox Network still on television? I’ve heard that they’ve been replaced by a new comedy show?? Or…maybe I’ve heard that the Fox Comedy Show has been replaced by reruns of Kukla, Fran and Ollie??? Maybe??
January 16th, 2007 at 4:13 pmThe “Right” wouldn’t know about culture. The “Right” are a bunch of Christians who are jealous at how the Taliban and other Islamic run states are able to squash any activities that would allow it’s people to express their culture.
The ability to express your culture has another name…… oh yes FREEDOM. To believe that the culture in the US is responsible for 9/11 is as idiotic as to believe that Christianity is responsible for all the good in the world.
January 16th, 2007 at 4:13 pm#8 I am tire of these mothaf*c%in snakes in this mothaf*c%in white house!!
sorry but it hd to be done
January 16th, 2007 at 4:16 pmHere’s a thought for D’Lousa:
Osama Bin Laden is responsible for 9/11.
George W. Bush and Condi Rice are responsible for NOT PREVENTING 9/11.
George W. Bush and Donald Rumsfeld are responsible for ALLOWING BIN LADEN TO REMAIN FREE.
January 16th, 2007 at 4:17 pmthat’s funny. I love it when folks that like killing as much as jesus talk about how it’s someone’s fault. Let’s review the facts eh?
guys from Saudi Arabia are blamed for attacking the US, all are either presumed dead, or bodies are never ID’d, right?
so, we naturally attack Afghanistan to get back at the Saudi’s.
that doesn’t work too well, so we go after the Iraqi’s and kill half a million of them for sport
then, since that doesn’t work, we nukularize Iran because we didn’t like what the shah once said to poppy?
anyone figured out that “we” are the “them” that the preznit keeps talking about killing to keep our country safe? and I do mean Paraguay!
January 16th, 2007 at 4:17 pmHe is what passes for an intellectual amongst a group of people who are both morally and intelectually bancrupt; the American right.
Watch how your liberal media fawns all over this bin laden ally whil he peddles his anti-American, anti-western, anti-enlightenment swill.
January 16th, 2007 at 4:18 pmOkay, Even I am willing to throw the flag on this one. The title of the book is inflammatory and serves no purpose other than to grab attention and drive up sales. At first blush, this book appears to be little better than the lunatic theories we so often see on this site positing that 9/11 was an “inside job” by the Bush administration, the Mossad, or an alliance thereof. Both ideas are repugnant and disrespectful to those killed on 9/11.
The terrorist attacks of 9/11/2001 were an attack by Al Qaeda on ALL Americans, left and right.
January 16th, 2007 at 4:18 pmI agree with this books premise. It has NOTHING…nothing to do with America acting like the communists and other bad guys by arming/funding dictators and terrorists to fight proxy wars and to suppress their own people. Arming Saddam didnt have anything to do with it. Working with the the Saudis and Pakistan to create Al Qeada and the other “holy warriors” had nothing to do with it. Creating a “jewish” aka zionist state in the middle of arab land after not existing for 2000 years had nothing to do with it. Having our CIA overthrow the Iranian government and put a puppet in its place had nothing to do with it. Nope the American conservative “we are afraid of everything enough to kill it” rightwingers never did anything to bring 911 onto America. It was all those liberty loving liberals and their weakness and inability to slaughter innocent millions to show how tuff we are that caused all that hatred to brew up into 911.
The Muslims didnt get fundamentalist in the last 20 years… it has been that way for 1500 years. Only in the last few decades has it turned into an uprising against us.
January 16th, 2007 at 4:20 pmAccording to the source, Vice President Dick Cheney highlighted the threat posed by Iran to not only Saudi Arabia but the whole region. “Tehran is not playing politics. Iranian leaders are using their country’s religious influence to support the aggressive regime’s ambition to expand,” the source quoted Dick Cheney as saying. Indicating participants of the meeting agreed to impose restrictions on the ambitions of Iranian regime before April 2007 without exposing other countries in the region to any danger, the source said “they have chosen April as British Prime Minister Tony Blair has said it will be the last month in office for him. The United States has to take action against Iran and Syria before April 2007.”
WAR WITH AMERICA – Iran dont wait for the start try a pre-emtive stike
1/ Iranian place 40-50 kilos of nerve gas smuggled into Mexican borders for release into Atmoshere over all republican states
January 16th, 2007 at 4:21 pm2/ Fishing boats of the coast of America with Anthrax for sailing upwind easterly and westerly
3/ Cans of Nerve agent for undergrounds in New York etc
4/ Sunni and Shia Militias ready to take on troops in Iraq
5/ Nerve agents placed on Missiles for attacks in Isreal
6/ Target Isreali Nuclear plants
7/ North Korea and Pakistan should sell a couple Nukes to Iran to be smuggled in helm of Yachts into San Francisco bay and New York
8/ Hit Oil Terminals In Middle East
9/ Use Iranian Submarines to Release Nerve agents on Florida coast
10/ HighJack Airliners to crash into American Nuclear Power stations
11/ Take no American Prisoners of war and waterboard them to death on Video for Live Leak
12/ Im Sure you can do better than this But its a start
Sound like D’Souza is comparing the EXTREME Christian right and the EXTREME Muslims and calling them the same. And if you take time to read the entire article, he makes a good point, up to a point.
So D’Souza is basically siding with bin Laden.
Comment by Leslie
The enemy of my enemy……
January 16th, 2007 at 4:22 pmI read the article and it basically says that the theme of D’Souza’s book is that the freedom of the non-religous and athesists in America forced moderate Islamists to become more traditional and fanitical. So because the non-religous, over-sexualized “cultural left” “abused” these freedoms they are to blame for these these fanatics flying planes into the WTC? Say what? Crazy. Don’t buy this book.
January 16th, 2007 at 4:22 pmExley, I agree.
“The terrorist attacks of 9/11/2001 were an attack by Al Qaeda on ALL Americans, left and right.”
You should have said ALL HUMANITY because more than a few were not Americans.
January 16th, 2007 at 4:24 pm*****That’s right you silly *progs*! You should have known it was a bad idea for us to get involved with Al Qaeda and terrorists just to fight those *commies*! It’s your fault that you didn’t stop our covert *conservative* operations that brought about these radical muslims!
You *progs* are the reason everything that is evil in the world exists! When the rapture happens, and Israel runs the world, you will all bow before me – queen of zion! And my vestil virgin sex slave Exley will be kneeling at my knee! As it should be! So silence Exley, these Progs caused all of this pain, and you know it dear boy!
January 16th, 2007 at 4:25 pmIran dont forget a Zimmerman Telegragh to Venezuala, Hope you used the last couple days to get nerve gas ready for agents in Mexico
If They have the cheek to Nuke you then I would understand this action
Good luck
January 16th, 2007 at 4:26 pm[...] Carl, I’ve got a real post coming soon.  In the meantime though, I think this new book signals to need to define an actual metric for wingnuttiness.  D’Souza has finally shaken off any pretenses about what the politic right in this country really thinks and is now basically saying, “Hey, Bin Laden’s right, America’s gotta go!” [...]
January 16th, 2007 at 4:30 pmYikes, Well, the primary target were Americans. But you are correct. The 9/11 attacks were a crime against all humanity.
January 16th, 2007 at 4:31 pmPlease keep in mind that this same author once wrote a book, The End of Racism, blaming racism in America on the civil rights movement. So nutty right-wing fringe ideas are not new to him.
January 16th, 2007 at 4:34 pmSo. Why does Dinesh D’Souza hate freedom?
January 16th, 2007 at 4:35 pmD’Souza is correct about one thing… there is an anti-religion crusade, but it isnt against the muslims… we here in the west have not experienced living under muslim oppression… no it is against the christians and their hundreds of years of burning women to death on the stake and putting nonbelievers in iron maidens and waterboarding “possessed” people, and even killing scientists for practicing scientific truth. We have found that REASON and SCIENCE nearly makes religion worthless at best and dangerous and backwards at worst.
It can hardly be called a crusade though. Science gives us something religion never will have … demonstrable TRUTH. And so religion has no chance…short of a nuclear holocaust or something like that which would knock humanity back into ….the darkages.
January 16th, 2007 at 4:41 pmSo, the great intellectual is saying…
The United States military bases on Muslim Holy ground had nothing to do with it.
Bankrolling the Muhajadeen against the Commies had nothing to do with it.
Disregarding memos titled “Bin Laden Determined to Attack Inside U.S.” had nothing to do with it.
The ongoing stuggle between Arabs, Israelis and those seen as allies of both had nothing to do with it.
It was the LEFT!
Once again, the “right” boils a complex and subtle issue into talking points and smear. Insulting and disgusting.
January 16th, 2007 at 4:42 pmExley,
Thank you.
Just thought it should be said.
January 16th, 2007 at 4:45 pmExley,
Right on. The conspiracy theories on both sides only serve to diffuse the discussion.
We were attacked by religious extremists and had and have every right to strike back. Hard.
So much of the frustration I feel is that Bush’s response to 9/11 was a diversion into Iraq for whatever reason. I don’t know that we will ever know the real reason. But we took our eye off the ball with his vendetta against Sadam and we will pay dearly for that diversion.
There is a solid 50% of Americans in the middle, maybe lean a little left or right, and the other 25% are on the fringes. Since Bush took a hard right stance and aligned himself with the 25% on that end, the debate has been dominated by the fringe 25%ers on either end.
January 16th, 2007 at 4:46 pmThe 9/11 attacks were a crime against all humanity.
Comment by Exley
For once, we agree. I would hope that you also find all US interventions against sovereign countries to defend american corporations as crimes against all humanity. But Im expecting that wont.
January 16th, 2007 at 4:48 pmBTW, do you think the 9/11 commission report is accurate in describing the 9/11 events?
I think there is a tendency for the debate to be controlled by the radical fringes. They are much more passionate about their beliefs then those with a more moderate bent.
January 16th, 2007 at 4:51 pmThe cultural left may be responsible for sexual liberation, but it’s the corporate right that relentlessly commercializes, markets, and distributes it around the world. Rupert Murdoch is the world’s largest peddler of porn.
If there were the slightest merit to this little toady’s arguments, he should blame the people who shove our smutty pop culture down the world’s throat – not the people who want to live their personal lives without the fear of the theocratic police state.
January 16th, 2007 at 4:51 pmWhat an idiot.
January 16th, 2007 at 4:57 pmJuan, We have had this discussion many, many times. I will repeat to you what I wrote to you in response to a similar question back in November 2006:
January 16th, 2007 at 5:00 pm“I would say in the post-World War II-era, yes, the U.S. [military actions] has been motivated by national security concerns. As for the period between the Spanish-American War amd the beginning of World War II, I make no argument that U.S. excursions into South and Central American countries were always motivated by national security concerns. I would agree with that economic concerns likely prompted many, if not most, of those military actions.”
Yeah, yeah, yeah, it’s all the “libruls”‘ fault.
January 16th, 2007 at 5:01 pmThe most dangerous enemy to America occupies the White House.
If they attacked us because they hated our liberal culture then why didn’t they attack our cultural centers? Fly a plane into Universal studios in Hollywood, or into Broadway in NY and I Could see that they hate us because of our culture. But flying planes into our economic and military centers makes it obviously clear they hate our imperialistic policies!
January 16th, 2007 at 5:01 pmyay… more fuel for that fire… as if they needed it…
last week i sent out a mass email with the thread, “Media Misleading Americans By Using ‘Surge’ To Describe Bush Policy”…
my brother in law sent this:
Tokyo Rose During World War II — the Japanese developed a way to demoralize the American forces. Psychological warfare experts developed a message they felt would work.
They gave the script to their famous broadcaster “Tokyo Rose” and every day she would broadcast this same message packaged in different ways, hoping it would have a negative impact on American GI’s morale.
What was that demoralizing message? It! had three main points:
1. Your President is lying to you.
2. This war is illegal.
3. You cannot win the war.
Does this sound familiar?
Is it because Tokyo Hillary, Tokyo Harry, Tokyo John, Tokyo Teddy, Tokyo Nancy, etc. have picked up the same message and are broadcasting it on Tokyo CNN, Tokyo ABC, Tokyo CBS, Tokyo NBC, etc., to our troops?
The only difference is that they claim to support our troops before they
demoralize them.
Come to think of it, Tokyo Rose told the troops she was on their side, too!
notice anything missing?
these right wingers are sick and delusional…
January 16th, 2007 at 5:02 pmThanks Peter, thats the ticket.
Greed caused 9/11 to happen, plain and simple, it boils down to greed. And the Greediest of them all are the filthy rich corporate types, and the politicians who support them.
January 16th, 2007 at 5:05 pmExley, you are right. We have discussed this a lot. I wont bring it again.
January 16th, 2007 at 5:06 pmOh, and by the way, baby boomers were terrible parents.
January 16th, 2007 at 5:08 pmAll the spoiled generation X and Y young adults are evidence of a complete breakdown in law and order in this nation.
It must be their fault.
No, Juan. I didn’t mean I don’t want to discuss it (although it is a little off-topic)…We can discuss it. I am curious as to your response. You didn’t respond back in November and I would be curious to hear your thoughts.
January 16th, 2007 at 5:08 pmIf they attacked us because they hated our liberal culture then why didn’t they attack our cultural centers?
Comment by bushflipflops
Furthermore, why they didnt attack Canada or Sweden or Finland or Germany? Because they dont have a left? So countries who have a left, a real left, I mean, are prone to be attacked by terrorists? mmm…the sad thing is that a lot of people will believe this right-wing baseless propaganda.
January 16th, 2007 at 5:12 pmThe Japanese also water-boarded their prisoners. In fact, it was regarded as a most heinous war-crime.
How does that fit into brother-in-law’s little scenario?
January 16th, 2007 at 5:13 pmKaty, obviously your brother-in-law must watch Fux news (he didn’t list them in his Tokyo ABC, etal list.) Does your sister side with you, or him? I’m lucky, Wayne’s sister is married to my brother, and we all have the same political bent, as does my sister. My extremely Catholic parents did a fine job raising a bunch of liberals!
January 16th, 2007 at 5:22 pmThe difference between Tokyo Rose and just about everybody in little georgies war?
America had the moral imperative to stop wars of aggression. Little georgies war IS a war of aggression. Just because America does it does not make it right. The reason WHY still applys no matter who you are. No one is infallible. And only the insane dont understand that.
January 16th, 2007 at 5:24 pmYou didn’t respond back in November and I would be curious to hear your thoughts.
Comment by Exley
About what exactly? Look, you support the actions of this government without accepting that these actions were motivated, at least for the general public, for the wrong reasons or at least really weak reasons in order to invade Iraq. No 9/11 connection, no WMDs and no freakin democracy. You would have suppported other interventions over sovereign little countries, cuz, as we know it is very unlikely that US would engage big countries, for the same weak reasons. Do you think Nicaragua or Panama were a threat to US? Or that Iraq can be a threat to the US? You are so frightened that you think an ant can kill an elephant. Your government takes advantage of that seeded fear and promotes war so that corporations get benefits out of your soldiers blood. This is the real world. And every fact points towards that way.
January 16th, 2007 at 5:25 pmOh look another pencil neck from AEI telling me how brave he is and how weak I am…yawn.
January 16th, 2007 at 5:35 pmIsn’t this author the one who earned the nickname early on of “Distort D’newza”? If so, then he isn’t well known for accuracy.
To be fair, maybe he’s changed over the last few years. I’ll never buy his book, but if I ever wanted to read it, I would check it out of a library. That way, he doesn’t get any of my money, and if the FBI hands my librarian an NSA letter asking to look at what books I’ve checked out, it would show books by conservative authors. (It won’t show books by liberal authors because I do buy them.)
January 16th, 2007 at 5:41 pm“Hahahahahahaha. Who published this piece of garbage?”
Bet you hadn’t even heard of it until today let alone read it.
January 16th, 2007 at 5:42 pmjane – my sister is of the laura schlessinger school of matrimonial submission… she’s a big dubya supporter…
January 16th, 2007 at 5:43 pmfunny – they are extremely proud of their oldest son who just retired from the air force – i’m proud of him too, but for different reasons…
he is 39, and i’m pretty sure he got out while the gettin’s good…
know what i mean?… he saw the writing on the wall… he spent some time in korea, but that’s all… you’d think it was he who pulled sadam out of that hole…
i can’t talk to them…
“the farthest thing from the cultural left there is.”
THANK GOD!
January 16th, 2007 at 5:43 pmSpam filter ate my post…
Juan, basically, I just complimented your last response to Exley.
January 16th, 2007 at 5:45 pmSorry, Katy, that must make family gatherings pretty stressful. Lucky thing your nephew retired when he did, hopefully his worldview is a little more reality-based than his parents.
January 16th, 2007 at 5:48 pmcannot wait until ABC makes a made for TV docu-drama based on this garbage!
whoops, too late
January 16th, 2007 at 5:50 pm“someone’s responsible for 9/11 and it’s certainly NOT the “cultural leftâ€, that’s for sure!”
Oh yes it is! Why do you think they flew planes into the twin towers? Because we are the wealthiest country in the world? No! Because we buy their oil? No! Because we have a bigger Military? No! It’s because of liberal values like:
the abortion of 35 million fetuses over the past 30 years
the acceptance of homosexuals
the shutting out of God by our societies
These are the reasons they hate us and they are all liberal values!
January 16th, 2007 at 5:52 pmIt’s funny what the greed mongers will “tolerate” if it turns a good profit.
Little girls’ dolls with tatoos, no joke. “Bratz” dolls, dressed up like little sex gangsters.
Porn is an 8 billion a year industry.
Selling products with fear-based marketing.
Consume, consume, consume.
Send the messages that you are not as good a person as the guy who has more stuff than you do.
They aren’t maliciously trying to erode our society and turn our value system into a joke. It was all just good business.
January 16th, 2007 at 5:54 pmThe Title of his book is True! if he can prove that it was liberals, and not the Bush administration, that conspired with their buddies in Saudi Arabia to attack us on 911, that is.
January 16th, 2007 at 5:55 pmDon’t buy this book.
Comment by vc #21
hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha!!!!
I’m sorry vc but…
…WHY ON EARTH would anyone need to be advised…
…not to buy a book…
…written by a thirty-something right wing mama’s boy?
Have you ever SEEN this guy?
…he looks like Hadji on bloating heart medication…
…the most disappointing part of this thread is…
…TP’s characterization of him as…
…”Prominent” and “intellectual”…
…yeeech!
January 16th, 2007 at 5:57 pmI await your response.
Comment by Exley
Gulf of tonkin
How many billions were made off that lie?
January 16th, 2007 at 5:58 pmthe abortion of 35 million fetuses over the past 30 years
the acceptance of homosexuals
the shutting out of God by our societies
These are the reasons they hate us and they are all liberal values!
Comment by michael
No the muslims dont know much about that….
Those ar the reasons why the American christian terrorists kill people.
January 16th, 2007 at 5:59 pmthe abortion of 35 million fetuses over the past 30 years
the acceptance of homosexuals
the shutting out of God by our societies
These are the reasons they hate us and they are all liberal values!
Comment by michael
Sgt michael mcflexin,
January 16th, 2007 at 5:59 pmisn’t tonight your Pat Robertson’s talking to God Bible Study tonight?
Man,I wish I could live in your shell, I mean, being brainwashed and not able to think and comprehend on one’s own. Priceless!
Re-enlist, buddy, and fight for those Repuclican Values
the abortion of 35 million fetuses over the past 30 years
the acceptance of homosexuals
the shutting out of God by our societies
These are the reasons they hate us and they are all liberal values!
Comment by michael — January 16, 2007 @ 5:52 pm
Then they would have attacked Canada, Sweden, Norway, or any other part of Europe before us. All of those countries are significantly more liberal then the US. sorry chap it doesn’t hold up.
Please stop trying to bait and get a clue, maybe even, gasp read the News once and a while, since you are woefully uninformed.
January 16th, 2007 at 6:01 pmAlright, alright…
Anybody who doesn’t know WHY the 9/11 attacks happened…
…raise your keyboards…
January 16th, 2007 at 6:03 pmThese are the reasons they hate us and they are all liberal values!
Comment by michael
As I’m sure others will tell you, michael, WRONG, WRONG, WRONG!
If you were living in the reality-based community, you would know that al Qaeda attacked us because of our policies in the Middle East, our blind (and I say inexplicable) support of Israel, and the fact that we troops on (what bin Laden considered to be) holy land.
Well, we started meeting bin Laden’s demands, you know. We started taking our troops out of Saudi Arabia, like bin Laden wanted us to.
Those reasons they attacked us, BTW, have nothing to do with liberal values and everything to do with conservative policies, values and thinking.
But thanks for crapping on our board game.
January 16th, 2007 at 6:03 pmUnbelievable,
You are darn right I defended Clinton. I strongly supported his actions is Bosnia and Kosovo (and sharply criticized Republicans who attacked the action). Our efforts in Kosovo and Bosnia were an example of America at its finest — Putting our troops in harm’s way for no other reason than to stop a great wrong and expecting nothing in return.
January 16th, 2007 at 6:03 pmAs a follow up, Unbelievable, let me ask you if you supported President Clinton’s actions in Bosnia/Kosovo?
January 16th, 2007 at 6:04 pmIt’s because of liberal values like:
the abortion of 35 million fetuses over the past 30 years
Considering they want us DEAD, they would hardly attack us for saving the planet from 35 million more Americans. Silly argument.
the acceptance of homosexuals
We don’t accept them. Remember the whole gay marriage ban? And besides, there are many European countries who accept gays that he hasn’t attacked that this makes your argument fallacious.
the shutting out of God by our societies
70% of our country is Christian. Osama is Muslim. Different god.
These are the reasons they hate us and they are all liberal values!
Comment by michael — January 16, 2007 @ 5:52 pm
Nonsense. He said very clearly that he attacked us for having stepped on holy soil in Saudi Arabia during the first attack on Iraq. Period.
If anything, experts on Osama have concluded that he prefers conservatives to run the country because they make his job of promoting hate for America easier…
January 16th, 2007 at 6:05 pmJust looked at CNN… a picture of a bunch of people walking up a street with blood running down it… I wonder what it is like… do they just try not to look at the blood? Are they just getting used to it? Doesnt it seem like they are living in another world?
January 16th, 2007 at 6:05 pmYou are darn right I defended Clinton. I strongly supported his actions is Bosnia and Kosovo (and sharply criticized Republicans who attacked the action).
Comment by Exley — January 16, 2007 @ 6:03 pm
Fine, but that was just one aspect of my comment to you. I said that you have to prove there is a threat. You’re dodging that?
Here’s the link I mentioned:
http://www.krysstal.com/democracy_whyusa02.html
Seriously, check it out…
January 16th, 2007 at 6:08 pmThree years ago, I too viewed “conspiracy theories” regarding 9/11 as outrageous. Having conducted literally thousands of hours of my own research – not any more.
The bottom line is that 9/11 REQUIRED a conspiracy, regardless of who you believe did it. The word “conspiracy” is a legal term. Larry Franklin and AIPAC conspired to transfer secret information on Iran to Israel. Scooter Libby and Dick Cheney conspired to out Valerie Plame as a CIA Agent. Jack Abramoff was charged with, among other things, “conspiracy.”
In your writing, you clearly stated that you “WANT TO KNOW THE TRUTH.” This single statement is the key to solving any crime. Until EVERY American really comes to that conclusion, the government and the media will continue to have us under their spell.
How many times have you ever heard the words “conspiracy theory” used by the government or the media in a positive light? How about NEVER? Yet we all watch the who-done-it movies and TV shows that virtually REQUIRE the investigators to have a theory about the conspiracy in order to solve the crime.
Having a theory about a conspiracy cannot be an inherently bad thing, yet we’ve all been conditioned since the Kennedy assassination to believe that EVERY theory about a conspiracy is inherently unpatriotic, insane, wacko – or whatever other negative adjective the Media and the government have conditioned us to believe. How did we all come to accept that only the law enforcement community has the where with all to “think like a criminal” – investigate the means, motive and opportunity, understand whether multiple players might be involved (the very definition of “conspiracy”), and develop a THEORY about the most logical explanation with respect to who committed the crime, and why?
It is a fact that five Mossad Agents were arrested in New York on 9/11, after having been witnessed celebrating (Google: “Dancing Israelis”). Who else celebrated in New York on 9/11? Shouldn’t we start to unravel the thread right there?
This one incident is the beginning of a path of logic that DOES NOT FIT the official government explanation of 9/11. This was the starting point for all of my research. How is it that five foreign agents were apprehended, found to have explosive, cash and box-cutters in their possession, were interrogated for six weeks, failed seven polygraph tests, and were quietly released by Israeli Citizen, Michael Chertoff?
Forget everything else you know or think you know about 9/11 and explain that single incident. You can’t. It Happened. It can only mean one thing.
Now – WHO WANTS TO KNOW THE TRUTH?
How badly do you want to know?
Pull the thread – and the entire story quickly unravels.
Means: (Sysplan, Ptech, Comverse, Mitre, Raytheon)
Motive: PNAC Implementation
Opportunity: Installation of NeoCon Cabal
The conspiracy was primarily between Likud (and their agents within the United States – Wolfowitz, Feith, Libby, Wurmser, Ledeen, Zelikow, Rhode, Rove, Rumsfeld, Cheney, Miller, Zakheim, Alexander, etc.) and the GHW Bush controlled CIA and Shadow Government.
GHW Bush is the largest drug dealer on earth. He uses CIA aircraft to run drugs. Afghanistan just had a bumper crop for ol “Poppy.” This is one of the means by which the globalists are able to fund their agenda outside of the Congressional budget process. Congress has been totally neutered. they DO NOT control the spending of the Shadow Government. While acting as “Comptroller” at DOD in the months prior to 9/11, Dov Zakheim stole $7 TRILLION and off-shored it to Israel. THAT’S YOUR MONEY.
Are you a coincidence theorist – or would you prefer to know the truth?
January 16th, 2007 at 6:09 pm#62 GGibson, I am inaccustomed to defending Lyndon Johnson’s foreign policy. So, I will only say that the Gulf of Tonkin controversy is irrelevant to Juan C’s disputable assertion that all U.S. military actions are undertaken purely for the purpose of protecting “corporate interests.”
January 16th, 2007 at 6:11 pm“Then they would have attacked Canada, Sweden, Norway, or any other part of Europe before us.”
Have you been on extended trip to the space station? They have been attacking other Western Nations and it is because of our collective values or lack of.
“Please stop trying to bait and get a clue”
First of all I am not trying to bait but point out the lack of values Western societies have developed over the past 35 years. They don’t envy our wealth; they’re not interested in it. They want to return the world to the stone age. Why do they hate us? Enough to sacrafice the lives of themselves and their families. VALUES! Liberals have hijacked ours!
January 16th, 2007 at 6:11 pm“experts on Osama”
Who are you referring to?
January 16th, 2007 at 6:13 pmAmnesty International, 1996 from “Human Rights and USA Security Assistance”:
“Throughout the world, on any given day, a man, woman or child is likely to be displaced, tortured, killed or ‘disappeared’, at the hands of governments or armed political groups. More often than not, the United States shares the blame.”
January 16th, 2007 at 6:14 pmGiven that the Islamic fundamentalists, could care less about whether you are conservative, or liberal you are very wrong. They only care to create a world that is based upon Islamic Law. If you think there is a place in there for conservative Christians you are very wrong. The attack on 9/11 had nothing to do with liberal vs conservative values, and everything to do with the general feelings of Osama Bin Laden, and other Islamic radicals, of oppression, and explotation by western culture, Christianity, and the Unites states.
January 16th, 2007 at 6:15 pmNoam Chomsky:
“Cluster bombs are much more dangerous than mines. They are vicious anti-personnel weapons that send out flechettes that tear people to shreds. They just sit there and if a child picks one up, or a farmer hits one with a hoe, it explodes.
“In Afghanistan nobody is going to clear these things. So in addition to the mines, there will be cluster bombs unexploded and very little ability to bring in food or blankets or to provide shelter. Many people will disappear and no one will even know what happened to them. No one is going to do a careful census of Afghanistan to find out what the effects were of the bombing and of the threat of bombing.
“The same is happening in many places. The estimates are that in northern Laos there are probably thousands of deaths a year, 30 years after the bombing. In Laos the Pentagon would not even provide instructions on how to defuse them to a volunteer British de-mining group that was working there. In Kosovo as well, the USA refused to remove cluster bombs.”
January 16th, 2007 at 6:15 pmUnbelievable, I will take a look at it. But even a cursory glance thus far indicates that list is hardly objectibe and unbiased.
It claims Clinton and NATO bombed Kosovo and Bosnia “to protect European business interests.” Do you really believe that? And where is the evidence? It is simply an assertion without any documentation.
Under the Afghanistan invasion, it does not mention that 9/11 and the slaughter of nearly 3,000 innocent men, women, and children may just have had a little teeny-weeny bit to do with it.
I will look at it in greater depth, but so far, I am unimpressed.
January 16th, 2007 at 6:16 pm#70 Un, great refutation!
January 16th, 2007 at 6:18 pmWho are you referring to?
Comment by michael — January 16, 2007 @ 6:13 pm
http://www.consortiumnews.com/2006/020306a.html
January 16th, 2007 at 6:21 pmComment by michael
What you call values I call two faced evil.
January 16th, 2007 at 6:22 pmTo all of you speaking of “They” want us Dead – or Bin Laden Did It – STOP.
You don’t have ANY proof that THEY did ANYTHING on 9/11 – nor do you have any proof that Bin Laden even exists.
Stop parroting unsubstantiated lies. You’ve been bamboozled. STOP.
BIN LADEN WAS NOT INVOLVED IN 9/11 – and none of you have any proof to the contrary – nor does the FBI. The difference is that at least the FBI admits they have no evidence to link Bin Laden to 9/11.
Have you actually LOOKED at the person in the fake Bin Laden video?
http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/osamatape.html
The FBI declines to confirm its authenticity.
http://www.physics911.net/kevinbarrett.htm
Top Bin Laden Expert: The Tapes are Fakes
Kevin Barrett
As a PhD in Islamic and Arabic Studies, I hate to say this, but I’ll say it anyway. The events of 9/11 had nothing to do with Islam. The war on terror itself is as phony as the latest “Bin Laden tape.â€
Compare the nose of the actor in the video tape with that of Bin Laden:
http://www.911blimp.net/vid_fakeOsamaVideo.shtml
This is NOT BIN LADEN.
Repeat this information often.
LOOK AT THE VIDEO – IT’S FAKE.
The Government’s “Bin Laden Confession Video” is a fake.
Pull the rest of that thread.
Bin Laden is NOT WANTED by the FBI in connection with 9/11.
STOP REPEATING THE LIE.
January 16th, 2007 at 6:29 pmComment by Exley
If I would have to guess I would say 50% of our wars are for business interests, 40% are just human ignorance not checked, and the rest is “neccessary”. I dont remember ever being under attack from south or central America yet we have kicked the crap out of those people. Vietnam same thing …millions killed. Kosovo? I dont know the why but at the time MY why was …how can those people be just slaughtering all those other people like the Jews were slaughtered? … let the bombs fall…
ace .. Americans for some reason are afraid of the truth… I dont understand why… the #1 example of Jesus was to go to the cross rather than stop telling the truth…. and we are supposedly a country with a strong christan block… If Clinton could pull a jet liner piece by piece off the bottom of the ocean and have it reconstructed to learn the truth I dont know why 911 didnt DEMAND even more detailed investigation…
January 16th, 2007 at 6:30 pmIt’s foolish to read books by people on the “right” bashing people on the “left” and vice versa.
The democrats vs. republicans argument is used by the elites to keep you distracted from what they’re doing.
Stop arguing with each other! Every American should be united with one purpose: to abolish the Federal Reserve! This is the evil creature they use to rule us. Demand an audit of the Federal Reserve! Abolish the Federal Reserve!
– Both from Tragedy and Hope by Carroll Quigley
January 16th, 2007 at 6:31 pmPutting our troops in harm’s way for no other reason than to stop a great wrong and expecting nothing in return.
Comment by Exley
Sorry if I dont drop a tear. Big fat freakin lie.
January 16th, 2007 at 6:31 pmUnbelievable, I will take a look at it. But even a cursory glance thus far indicates that list is hardly objectibe and unbiased.
In other words… No you won’t.
Bull Exley. They specifically say:
Do not simply believe anything on this web site – always check for yourself. Treat the stories and quotes in these pages as pointers to find out more. Learn to think for yourself and check all information.
Propagandists discourage you to question them…
It claims Clinton and NATO bombed Kosovo and Bosnia “to protect European business interests.†Do you really believe that? And where is the evidence? It is simply an assertion without any documentation.
Yes. Read “Propaganda and the Public Mind” by Noam Chomsky. He spells it out all very logically.
Under the Afghanistan invasion, it does not mention that 9/11 and the slaughter of nearly 3,000 innocent men, women, and children may just have had a little teeny-weeny bit to do with it.
To a sociopath such as Bush, it probably didn’t. To the American people, however, it did. But that’s not what the site is about.
I will look at it in greater depth, but so far, I am unimpressed.
Comment by Exley — January 16, 2007 @ 6:16 pm
Because it doesn’t agree with you…
And I’ll remind you that YOU have to prove there was a legitimate threat. I haven’t seen you devote so much as one word to that undertaking… Why is it? Have nothing?
January 16th, 2007 at 6:34 pmLiberals knocked over building 7 yea a huh.
January 16th, 2007 at 6:34 pm#87…Typical Juan posting. Assertion without facts or explanation.
Why do you say that, Juan?
January 16th, 2007 at 6:37 pmace – you stop it.
Go post on some 9/11 conspiracy website, and not here where TP has told you not to fill threads with it.
We’re trying to have a legitamate conversation and you’re trying to disrupt it with a series of lengthy posts.
January 16th, 2007 at 6:39 pmWhy do you say that, Juan?
Comment by Exley — January 16, 2007 @ 6:37 pm
Projection…
January 16th, 2007 at 6:40 pm#88, No, Unbelievable, I said I will look at it and I will.
As for your questions: “And I’ll remind you that YOU have to prove there was a legitimate threat. I haven’t seen you devote so much as one word to that undertaking… Why is it? Have nothing?”
To what are you referring? Iraq? Or each military action?
As for Chomsky, I have read enough of him to recognize that he is worthy of no heed…He is a linguist who poses as a political scientist and historian but who is little more than an apologist for murderous dictators such as Pol Pot and Milosevic.
January 16th, 2007 at 6:41 pmNo, Unbelievable, I said I will look at it and I will.
We’ll see…
To what are you referring? Iraq? Or each military action?
B. It’s your claim that they all were vaild. Prove it.
As for Chomsky, is little more than an apologist for murderous dictators such as Pol Pot and Milosevic.
Comment by Exley — January 16, 2007 @ 6:41 pm
Nonsense – he’s against murder. But you just attack his charcter because you can’t attack his arguments.
January 16th, 2007 at 6:46 pmUn, great refutation!
Comment by RUCerious — January 16, 2007 @ 6:18 pm
Thanks : )
January 16th, 2007 at 6:50 pmOy.
Dinesh D’Souza reportedly dated Ann Coulter and Laura Ingraham, to whom he was engaged but never married.
Heh.
January 16th, 2007 at 6:50 pmAn OJ type!
January 16th, 2007 at 6:54 pmUbelieveable, I don’t want to turn this into a discussion of the merits or lack thereof of Chomsky. While he is clearly very intelligent, I believe he uses that intellect to justify and deny the crimes of some the most ruthless dictators on earth.
As for what I said about post World War II-military actions, I did not say that they were all “valid” or that I agreed with them all. What I did say is that they were all motivated by national security concerns, (whether correctly or incorrectly) rather than the dubious desire to protect “corporate interests.”
January 16th, 2007 at 6:55 pmBill Moyer was right…
…those (journalists in particular) who are too close to power …
…are blinded by its aura…
…Jim Lehrer was just interviewing Bushiva and asked,
… “how (any) President could conduct a war without the support of the majority of the American people and the Congress?”
…Bushiva went on to pontificate about the interview being his (Bushiva’s) attempt to convince the public and Congress of how important “victory” in Iraq is to our future…
…finally, Bushiva outlines how twenty years in the future (if we leave Iraq prematurely) radical Sunnis and Shia will compete for control of the oil fields…
…with which to blackmail (us)…and add into this melee the nuclear threat and (we) would find ourselves in deep sh*t (paraphrasing of course)…
To my utter astonishment Lehrer’s follow up question was…
…”Mr. President, if this war is so important why haven’t you asked for more sacrifice from more of the American people than just the troops and their families?”
NOT:
“Mr. President, if you really believed that radical Islam would take over the oil fields of Iraq, shouldn’t you have known that your overthrowing Saddam Hussein (clearly a bulwark AGAINST radical Islam in that region) in such a way as to create a power vacuum would virtually assure the success of such a scenario…
…whether we leave now, six months or ten years from now?”
WOW…maybe even our learned journalistic establishment are nothing more than simpletons too…
hmmmm….
January 16th, 2007 at 6:56 pmWhat about the “culture” of the right and that fiasco in Iraq?
January 16th, 2007 at 6:58 pmNow, where did Osama get all those guns and support? Hollywood? San Francisco? Oh, that’s right, he got them from Ronald Reagan and Donald Rumsfeld.
January 16th, 2007 at 6:59 pmThis whole thing will fall apart as soon as someone with the stomach to read it (not me, please) exposes enough of the arguments for peope to examine. I remember D’souza from his first riollour as the brilliant boy of the reich-wing intellectual corps. He got his start doing national debates with Stanley Fish over whatever the right-wing hissy fit was about then, evolution I believe.
January 16th, 2007 at 7:07 pmEnough to sacrafice the lives of themselves and their families. VALUES! Liberals have hijacked ours!
Comment by michael #75
michael,
…trust me…
YOUR repressed sexuality due to a puritanistic upbringing…
…is NOT a major factor in geopolitical turmoil…
Islamist holy warriors may despise our decadent culture, but certainly don’t claim THAT as the causus belli for attacking us…
…research U.S. economic and foreign policy relevant to WTO and IMF loan policies…
…also read “Confessions of an Economic Hit Man”…
…you’ll definitely gain a “broader perspective”…
January 16th, 2007 at 7:12 pmUnbelievable, I continue to be unimpressed:
1950 – Korea – Killing Civilians – None – Unknown.
Okay, so the authors of this little chart never heard of the invasion of South Korea by Communist North Korea in June 1950 and that the United Nations approved of military action to stop this aggression.
Moreover, I find it amusing that after feigning ignorance of the North Korean invasion, the authors are unable to even come up with one of their supposed “true motives” behind the military action.
And do you actually believe that the United Nation’s actions during the Korean War amounted to nothing more than “Killing civilians?” This is silliness.
But I will continue to look.
January 16th, 2007 at 7:12 pmOne behavior that the right-wing in this country and the right-wing in other places exhibits is calculated misogeny. Women with equal intellectual power and access to equal treatment under the law are always a threat to the male-dominated structures of conservative societies. I expect that much of what D’Souza decries as the moral decay of our society is directly linked to freedom and equal rights for women.
January 16th, 2007 at 7:13 pmActually, this guy’s book is entirely right, at least in thesis.
Conservative societies all over the world look to modern, Western societies and fear it. We have different cultural values, and they hate it and are afraid that one day their heirs will be like us. The people who attacked us on 911 were liberal bashing assholes, just like the ones we have here in America.
It wouldn’t surprise me if one day, long after the right wing of this country loses more ground in their “culture war,” that we begin having extremist conservative American groups attacking us from within for our sinful ways.
In fact, I’d go so far as to say that some conservative groups in America were glad 9/11 happened, because a country in fear always becomes more conservative and culturally oppressive. They’re just sad the effects of it are wearing off, now that we’re a few years away from the event.
January 16th, 2007 at 7:19 pmAs for Chomsky, I have read enough of him to recognize that he is worthy of no heed…He is a linguist who poses as a political scientist and historian but who is little more than an apologist for murderous dictators such as Pol Pot and Milosevic.
Comment by Exley
Then you havent read Chomsky.
January 16th, 2007 at 7:22 pmunbelievable is trying to impress Exley?
Go figure…
January 16th, 2007 at 7:22 pmI guess Michael is part of the “blame America first” crowd. Evidently, Michael believes that if we would just adopt fundamentalist religious values, terrorists wouldn’t attack us. In other words, we need to capitulate to the religious demands of terrorists. Nice going, Michael. Great arguments. It was George Washington who hoped that America would be a shining example of liberality for the rest of the world. Michael doesn’t agree with George Washington.
January 16th, 2007 at 7:25 pmIt wouldn’t surprise me if one day, long after the right wing of this country loses more ground in their “culture war,†that we begin having extremist conservative American groups attacking us from within for our sinful ways.
Comment by Dave M. #106
I suspect you never heard of the Ku Klux Klan/ (White Citizen’s Council)…
…and THEIR violent crusade against sinful:
integration
January 16th, 2007 at 7:29 pmmiscegenation
religious diversity
voting rights
D’Souza has always been a snake and a bottom feeder, but now he has sunk to a new low.
January 16th, 2007 at 7:30 pmAlso, did anyone tell Dinesh that a major source of Arab anger against the West is due to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict? One of the principle tenets of Islam is a respect for justice. The Israeli-Palestinian situation has been festering for 60 years, and the clear vicitms are the Palestinans. Many of the “Islamic radicals” began to follow that line of thinking as a result of this western-induced ballsup in the ME. And it was a perfect advertisement for radical clerics to recruit young men, especially in Palestine and Egypt.
January 16th, 2007 at 7:31 pmI listened to Thom Hartmann interview D’souza (DS) on his radio program today. It took ten minutes before DS finally blamed 9/11 on Clinton.
Osama may hate our culture and values but he gives two thumbs up to our weapons and explosives. Also, crashing camels into infidel skyscrapers is obviously less effective than using Western built airplanes. At least he supposedly recognizes that we have produced some things of value.
Too bad the Muslim fanatics don’t know that a bad review in the New Yorker is almost as effective a criticism of our culture as bringing down a few buildings.
A few years ago DS delivered a statement on NPR about the “population explosion” He stated that the total world population (6 billion) could live in the state of Texas, leaving the rest of the world free to produce food. The next 6 bil. could supposedly live in Cal and Nev. Thus, there is no problem with expanding population.
January 16th, 2007 at 7:36 pmAlso, crashing camels into infidel skyscrapers is obviously less effective than using Western built airplanes.
Comment by pedant — January 16, 2007 @ 7:36 pm
heh… thanks for that chuckle…
January 16th, 2007 at 7:43 pmI have a scab on my forehead from doing a faceplant while sledding recently.
I think that’s much more impressive than reading Chomsky, sound’s like he eats a lot.
January 16th, 2007 at 7:47 pmI have to say that this book and it’s silly neocon cultist are the some of the silliest things I’ve seen in quite a few years. Let’s see, Noam Chomsky mentions that some of our foreign policy decisions may have played a part in the terrorist attack and he is widely attacked by right-wingers as a “blame America first” kind of guy. This shitheal writes an entire book blaming Americans for the attack and conservatives all stare off into space. Fracking ridiculous.
January 16th, 2007 at 7:48 pmPedant: “A few years ago DS delivered a statement on NPR about the “population explosion†He stated that the total world population (6 billion) could live in the state of Texas, leaving the rest of the world free to produce food. The next 6 bil. could supposedly live in Cal and Nev. Thus, there is no problem with expanding population.”
The classic science fiction book called “The World Inside” deals with what could happen with that kind of thinking. It’s short. Check it out.
January 16th, 2007 at 7:50 pmOne of Hitler’s most often-cited books during his rise to power and in support of his demonizing of the Social Democrats and others on the left in early 20th century Germany, Oswald Spengler’s “Der Untergang des Abendlandes” (The Decline of the West), has pretty much been tuned up and post-911-ized for propaganda by the fanatical right, whose first steps could proudly be “marched” by D’Souza’s opinions.
When will publishers finally realize that drivel is NOT scholarly?
When too will they realize that they may be unwitting accomplices to the imminent irreparable splintering of our nation through careless dissemination of un-opinions that fester in the shallow minds of so many Americans, who have been conditioned to fear the loss of their nachos, reality TV, SUVs and ever-lengthening Christmas shopping seasons?
Are we in a war on terror? Yes—but then who are the terrorists? Who is instilling fear in us? Those thousands of miles away or those in places of power and wealth among us here?
You decide. Just be careful. You will deserve the results of your decisions.
January 16th, 2007 at 8:01 pmComment by ForTruth — January 16, 2007 @ 7:47 pm
and the laughs just keep on comin’! … aw jeez… another funny…
January 16th, 2007 at 8:01 pmFracking ridiculous.
Comment by Bluedog49 — January 16, 2007 @ 7:48 pm
good point… i shall remember that one…
January 16th, 2007 at 8:03 pmI can remove a temporary tooth to eat. Seriously. Its a hoot.
January 16th, 2007 at 8:06 pmI’m glad I don’t really have to worry about this Dinandash dude. Seems pretty inconsequencial to me. Only the hardcore* readers know this stuff.
*I mean people who read a lot.
January 16th, 2007 at 8:09 pmUnbelievable:
The ACTUAL TOPIC of this thread is about a 9/11 Conspiracy Theory.
What I posted is a contrary theory to the one that says liberals are to blame.
Mine is based in factual evidence with supporting links.
Can you explain why five Mossad Agents were arrested in New York on 9/11?
Google “Dancing Israelis”
Explain it.
I don’t think they were Liberals.
What’s your theory?
Stop trying to silence people.
January 16th, 2007 at 8:12 pmHey ace,
I have my opinions about 9/11, but in due time things will come to light. I let people have thier own opinions.
January 16th, 2007 at 8:20 pmI can remove a temporary tooth to eat. Seriously. Its a hoot.
Comment by ForTruth — January 16, 2007 @ 8:06 pm
oh no! …you lost a tooth in that sledding accident? …awful!…
January 16th, 2007 at 8:23 pmreally, my daughter lost her front tooth falling off her bike at 14… the dentist said to wait till she was 20 before getting an implant and crown… just finished up that ordeal last summer…
Actually Katy,
It was a coincidence. I am having some dental work done, and have a tempory right now. I did worry about knocking out the temporary, but it didn’t happen.
I could have gone with the macho man thing, but it really ain’t me.
January 16th, 2007 at 8:28 pmWhat I did say is that they were all motivated by national security concerns, (whether correctly or incorrectly) rather than the dubious desire to protect “corporate interests.â€
Comment by Exley — January 16, 2007 @ 6:55 pm
And what I said was – prove it. Prove they were all motivated by national security concerns.
January 16th, 2007 at 8:34 pmUnbelievable, I continue to be unimpressed:
1950 – Korea – Killing Civilians – None – Unknown.
If someone doesn’t know and they say so, you are unimpressed by their integrity to say so? What, you’d rather them lie? Make something up to save face?
I find their honesty refreshing.
Okay, so the authors of this little chart never heard of the invasion of South Korea by Communist North Korea in June 1950 and that the United Nations approved of military action to stop this aggression.
That’s not what they are saying Exley. Don’t start with the strawmen.
Try this thought on for a few minutes. Military action isn’t the only or first reaction…
Moreover, I find it amusing that after feigning ignorance of the North Korean invasion, the authors are unable to even come up with one of their supposed “true motives†behind the military action.
Again, people not lying bothers you?
Doesn’t say much about your moral compass Exley…
And do you actually believe that the United Nation’s actions during the Korean War amounted to nothing more than “Killing civilians?†This is silliness.
Exley – that is who dies in wars in populated areas – innocent civilians. If you think otherwise you are not only fooling yourself, but you are incapable of empathy.
But I will continue to look.
Comment by Exley — January 16, 2007 @ 7:12 pm
Why? You’ve already made up your mind and are attacking their honesty and integrity. It’s proof that you have nothing. But I’m not surprised since you keep refusing to answer my requests for proof to your claim that our many military actions were and are about national defense. I’m guess it is because Juan was right…
January 16th, 2007 at 8:41 pmunbelievable is trying to impress Exley?
Where the hell did you get that?
I don’t try to impress other liberals.
Go figure…
Comment by Zooey — January 16, 2007 @ 7:22 pm
Meaning?
January 16th, 2007 at 8:43 pmI think that’s much more impressive than reading Chomsky, sound’s like he eats a lot.
Comment by ForTruth — January 16, 2007 @ 7:47 pm
Who’s hijacking names again?
You won’t chase us away.
January 16th, 2007 at 8:45 pmAIE/PNAC/Hudson…same bunch of morons who benefitted more from 9/11 than anyone else. Please don’t censor me for asking this…how quickly were the champagne glasses raised to celebrate an absolute necessity for world hegemony (full spectrum dominance and all)? 9/11 could’ve been stopped. Read more @ cooperativeresearch.org
January 16th, 2007 at 8:46 pmComment by unbelievable
I was being SARCASTIC!
Exley said he continued to be unimpressed with whatever you were telling him.
Geez…
January 16th, 2007 at 8:47 pmUnbelievable, that was really me, I’m being a smartass. No offense intended.
January 16th, 2007 at 8:48 pmThe ACTUAL TOPIC of this thread is about a 9/11 Conspiracy Theory.
Nope. Judd has repeatedly made it clear that 9/11 Conspiracy Theories are ridiculous. That’s what this thread is actually about.
What’s your theory?
I’ve posted it in the past – many times. Google it.
Stop trying to silence people.
Comment by ace — January 16, 2007 @ 8:12 pm
You were the one to tell me to shut up – so go take your own advice. And don’t complain when your posts get deleted.
January 16th, 2007 at 8:51 pmI was being SARCASTIC!
Exley said he continued to be unimpressed with whatever you were telling him.
Geez…
Comment by Zooey — January 16, 2007 @ 8:47 pm
Sorry, I missed it.
January 16th, 2007 at 8:52 pmUnbelievable, that was really me, I’m being a smartass. No offense intended.
Comment by ForTruth — January 16, 2007 @ 8:48 pm
I seem to lose my sense of humor around Exley. Probably because he is so f*cking irritating and willfully dense… Sorry.
And then all these damn 20%ers… Jesus they are maddening.
January 16th, 2007 at 8:54 pmIt’s all good Unbelievable.
Those damn die hard 20% supporters mess up the elections, almost every time.
January 16th, 2007 at 8:57 pmThose damn die hard 20% supporters mess up the elections, almost every time.
Comment by ForTruth — January 16, 2007 @ 8:57 pm
Not to mention all the innocent people being killed to appease their raging fear of things that do not exist (boogeymen, gods, and their own consciences).
January 16th, 2007 at 9:03 pm…TP’s characterization of him as…
…â€Prominent†and “intellectualâ€â€¦
…yeeech!
Comment by big papa
I generally agree with you, big papa. But you’ve got to give the guy some credit for having enough brains to break off his engagement to Laura Ingraham.
January 16th, 2007 at 9:03 pmAll right, I’m gonna go do something else… Exley overload…
Night all!
January 16th, 2007 at 9:04 pmYou were the one to tell me to shut up – so go take your own advice. And don’t complain when your posts get deleted.
Comment by unbelievable — January 16, 2007 @ 8:51 pm
Be factual. I never told you to “shut up.”
I told everyone to STOP parroting the administration’s fantasy of 9/11 without a single shred of evidence. I provided actual evidence related to 9/11.
Be careful with your accusations.
January 16th, 2007 at 9:04 pmStupdity is offensive isn’t it?
January 16th, 2007 at 9:30 pmDon’t you wonder about late night conversations between D’souza and Ingraham — probably would make one want to puke.
January 16th, 2007 at 9:56 pmHe also dated Ann Coulter – more puking.
“Those ar the reasons why the American christian terrorists kill people.”
Really? Who are all these Christian terrorists killing people? Names please? Lots of them?
January 16th, 2007 at 10:03 pmActually, I never said I was unimpressed with what Unbelievable was saying. What I said was that I was unimpressed with the link that Unbelievable sent. It is a site that purposely omits historical information that undermines the point it is trying to make. It is a site that has an agenda and then attempts to fit the facts to support a conclusion it has already made. This is evidenced by the fact that in discussing the Korean War it purposely omits information about the communist North Korean invasion of South Korea in 1950 and the fact that the military action on the Korean peninsula in 1950-53 was a United Nations operation.
Indeed, the Korean War example goes to root of the flaw in the Web site Unbelievable passed along. It provides no historical context. It makes no reference to the larger global conflict that was taking place between 1945 and 1990; namely, the Cold War between the United States and the West and the communnist bloc led by the USSR. The vast majority of the military actions listed on the site are directly related to the Cold War, such as U.S. aid to Greece anti-communists after World War II during the Greek Civil War, the aid to the Nicaraguan freedom fighters that ultimately defeat the communist Sandinista dictatorship, aid to the democratically elected government of Jose Napoleon Duarte in El Salvador to defeat the communist insurrection, etc.
As we know, as a result of the U.S.’s actions against the communist bloc and the Soviet Union in those and other theaters ultimately led to communism’s defeat and freedom for millions of people who lived under communist oppression for since the early 20th century. So, yes, Unbelievable, the vast majority, if not all of the post-World War II military actions were justified and, thankfully, ultimately successful. And the result was the defeat of communism, the most murderous, oppressive ideology in world history and subsequent freedom for millions of people.
January 16th, 2007 at 10:06 pm“our blind (and I say inexplicable) support of Israel”
How is it blind? Are you saying we should abandon Israel? If our presence isn’t there, who will assure the uninterrupted flow of oil to the WORLD? Iranians?
January 16th, 2007 at 10:07 pm“If we don’t support Israel no matter what they do”
And just what is it that they do which you disapprove? Be specific?
January 16th, 2007 at 11:19 pm** ALERT **
this guy is guest on COLBERT tonight… now…
January 16th, 2007 at 11:30 pm…
Holy shit, Colbert just got this tool to say that he agreed with Bin Laden’s reasons for attacking America.
Bye bye, book sales.
January 16th, 2007 at 11:54 pmFrom the book: “Muslims are not enraged by our political freedom or democracy, but by the left’s abuse of that freedom, specifically the excessive sexualization of our society.”
Muslims aren’t enraged by political freedom, democracy, or the left. Taxpayers were targeted and killed on 9/11 because the psychopathic murders see them as the people who’s money gets sent over to Israel as $3 billion dollar grants by the United States Government so Israel can continue killing 4 or 5 times as many people as their enemy does.
Will you nit-wits SHUT UP!
January 16th, 2007 at 11:58 pmdefinetely a tool…
January 17th, 2007 at 12:14 amcolbert had trouble disguising his contampt… got him good though…
but what a complete tool…
“The Enemy at Home”? Try again D’Souza…
Shock and Awe: Achieving Rapid Dominance (1996)
by Harlan K. Ullman and James P. Wade National Defense University
http://www.dodccrp.org/shockIndex.html
“In assessing the future utility and applicability of Rapid Dominance, it is crucial to consider the political context in which force is likely to be employed. As we enter the next century, the probability is low that an over-riding, massive, direct threat posed by a peer-competitor to the US will emerge in the near term.
Without compelling reasons, public tolerance toward American sacrifice abroad will remain low and may even decrease.
This reluctance on the part of Americans to tolerate pain is directly correlated to perceptions of threat to US interests. Without a clear and present danger, the definition of national interest may remain narrow.”
“Many challenges or crises in the future are likely to be marginal to US interests and therefore may not be resolvable before American political staying power is exhausted.
In this period, political micro-management and fine tuning are likely to be even more prevalent as administrations respond to public sentiments for minimizing casualties and, without a threat or compelling reason, US involvement.”
“Americans prefer not to intervene, especially when the direct threat to the US is ambiguous, tenuous, or difficult to define.”
“Second, it is relatively clear that current US military capability will shrink. Despite the pledges of the two major American political parties to maintain or expand the current level of defense capability, both the force structure and defense infrastructure are too large to be maintained at even the present levels and within the defense budgets that are likely to be approved.
Unless a new menace materializes, defense is headed for less of the same. Such reductions may have no strategic consequences. However, that is an outcome that we believe should not be left to chance.”
“In both relative and absolute terms, since the end of World War II, the military strength and capability of the United States have never been greater.
Yet this condition of virtual military superiority has created a paradox.
Absent a massive threat or massive security challenge, it is not clear that this military advantage can always be translated into concrete political terms that advance American interests.”
“Beyond prudence, however, it is clear that without a major threat to generate consensus and to rally the country around defense and defense spending, the military posture of the United States will erode as the defense budget is cut.”
“The absence of a direct and daunting external security threat is, of course a most obvious aspect of the difficulty in defining the future defense posture of the nation. The United States has long resisted maintaining a large standing military and the Cold War years could prove an aberration to that history.
Extending this historical observation of small standing forces, it is clear that there is no adversary on the horizon even remotely approaching the military power of the former USSR. While we might conjure up nominal regional contingencies against Korea or Iraq as sensible planning scenarios for establishing the building blocks for force structure, it will prove difficult to sustain the current defense program over the long term without a real threat materializing to rally and coalesce public support.”
http://www.dodccrp.org/shockIndex.html
“Former National Security Advisor Zbigniew Brzezinski published a book in which he portrays the Eurasian landmass as the key to world power, and Central Asia with its vast oil reserves as the key to domination of Eurasia.
The attitude of the American public toward the external projection of American power has been much more ambivalent.
“The public supported America’s engagement in World War II largely because of the shock effect of the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor“, he says.
Because of popular resistance to US military expansionism, his Central Asian strategy can not be implemented except in the circumstance of a truly massive and widely perceived direct external threat.”
From The Terror Timeline by Paul Thompson
“History is replete with instances in which warnings signs were ignored and change resisted until an external improbable event forced resistant bureaucracies to take action. The question is whether the US will be wise enough to act responsibly and soon enough to reduce US space vulnerability. Or whether, as in the past, a disabling attack against the country and its people – a space Pearl Harbor – will be the only event able to galvanize the nation and cause the US government to act.”
-The Rumsfeld Commission (assigned to assess US National Security Space Management and Organization) January 11, 2001
“You and other Democrats in Congress have voiced fear that you simply don’t have enough money for the large increase in defense that the Pentagon is seeking, especially for missile defense, and you fear that you’ll have to dip into the Social Security funds to pay for it. Does this sort of thing convince you that an emergency exists in this country to increase defense spending, to dip into Social Security, if necessary to pay for defense spending- increase defense spending?”
-Donald Rumsfeld (speaking to Senator Carl Levin) September 11, 2001
“To be truthful about it, there was no way we could have got the public consent to have suddenly launched a campaign on Afghanistan, but for what happened on September 11.”
Tony Blair (July 2002)
From The Terror Timeline by Paul Thompson
January 17th, 2007 at 12:26 amWhy did this site fall into the trap of even mentioning this hate-book?
January 17th, 2007 at 1:30 am#58, Micheal
I have never heard a Terrorist mention homosexuals or abortions as their basis for attacks. According to you the terrorist must be so sensitive, they can kill thousands of people, but feel sympathy for an unborn American child? Give me a break, they would probably be glad to see one more American dead.
What the terrorist do mention American expansion and imperialism, Israel and Palestine, the Saudi monarchy, the Crusades, the list goes on and on.. But homosexuals and abortionist have never been mentioned, as far as I know.
Anyone with a brain and without right wing paranoia can see very clearly why the terrorist attack– It has everything to do with our foreign policy JACKASS. It has little to do with how we conduct ourselves at home but more about how we conduct ourselves abroad.
The quack who wrote this book is pushing paranoid conspiracy theories. What these right wing Darbyist types do not seem to realize is how similar they look to the radical Islamic terrorist~ their ideology is basically the same – they hate freedom, they hate liberty and they have zero tolerance for anyone who’s belief system is structured just a little differently than theirs.
So I think we found the problem, right wing religious zealots.
January 17th, 2007 at 1:54 amThe morons that voted for Bush are squarely to blame for 9/11. They elected (well not really elected) an incompetent buffoon and his lackeys that ignored the threat of Al Queda. They ignored the plan to strike Bin Laden that Richard Clarke handed them.
The dumb bumpkins and uneducated simpletons elected a man that has and continues to do business with people who kill Americans. Bush and his gang then completly failed to bring the perpetrators of 9/11 to justice. Funding from Pakistan, hijackers and money from Saudi Arabia = invading Iraq? Bush lovers, you have reaped what you sewed. An ignorant, unitelligent, greedy, f@cking failure is who you chose to lead our country. Nearly 3000 dead on 9/11, over 3000 soldiers killed in Iraq. God knows how many dead Iraqis, and for what? What have we gained since his (stolen) election? A more powerful Iran, North Korea, and China. Thanks a f*ckin’ lot Bush lovers. How does the blood of thousands of innocents feel when its up to your neck?
January 17th, 2007 at 1:57 am#160
For one – There is no such thing as “God’s chosen people”, it’s time to wake up. There is no such thing as a “special people” I hope you realize that is an inherently racist belief.
Two- Haider Mohammad is probably mentally unbalanced and you know as well as I know the loser didn’t have connections to the butcher of Baghdad or to OBL. Get real, can someone say “non event”
Three- So what do you mean? Do you mean it is OK for someone to encourage the killing of Muslims, but not of the Jews? What, the Jews have some right to live that is higher or better than other races or religions?
You know what? Screw you, little whimpering b*tch and any other person who believes there is a “chosen” people and that Jews have any more of a right to live than any other person.
Threats against Muslims are threats as well. And your defending a blogger who wants to advocate killing all Muslim kids while you lick your wounds about some non event? AND YOU WONDER WHY THEY HATE YOU!!!!!!
January 17th, 2007 at 2:10 amOnce we know that we cannot blame the rapid “collapses” of the WTC skyscrapers on “airplanes” (hijacked or otherwise), it is intellectually dishonest to continue to blame 9/11 on “hijackers”.
Please stop repeating Bush’s and Lieberman’s lies.
January 17th, 2007 at 3:11 amI am a graduate student at Stanford and I have to look at the damned Hoover tower every day . . . or rather, the center phallus upon which the cultural right “firmly” rides. It’s fitting that this physically castrated rhetoric (in that they want every one else to fight these absurd wars while they reside in their ivory dildo) flows from a symbol of overcompensation.
January 17th, 2007 at 3:42 amIsn’t “conservative intellectual” an oxymoron?
January 17th, 2007 at 4:25 amNot even Pentagon agrees with the guy.
‘They hate our policies, not our freedom’
‘Muslims do not hate our freedom, but rather they hate our policies [the report says]. The overwhelming majority voice their objections to what they see as one-sided support in favor of Israel and against Palestinian rights, and the long-standing, even increasing, support for what Muslims collectively see as tyrannies, most notably Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Jordan, Pakistan and the Gulf states. Thus, when American public diplomacy talks about bringing democracy to Islamic societies, this is seen as no more than self-serving hypocrisy.’
http://www.csmonitor.com/2004/1129/dailyUpdate.html
http://www.acq.osd.mil/dsb/reports/2004-09-Strategic_Communication.pdf
___
“What they will do is stagger along until there’s a major incident and then suddenly say, ‘Oh my God, shouldn’t we be organized to deal with this?”
Fmr. Nat. Comm. On terrorism chairman Paul Bremer (Feb. 26. 2001)
It was self serving alright. 9/11 was essential for the neocons and their PNAC agenda.
January 17th, 2007 at 6:27 amAl-Qaeda? Al-Qaeda means the “Base”. Ah, that sounds more like the Establishment or the WhiteHouse, or…. Funny how Bush and co turns every American to kids, scaring the shit out of them about the boogey who is coming to take away their freedom.
And the US media joins in, especially Faux Noise, making us believe these monsters are our biggest nightmare, yet Al-Qaedi can’t even touch the unsecured and hated royal sh****t heads down here in Saudi-Arabia, the home land of Osama-boogeyman.
Well lets see how many face the boogeyman would further possess. At first it was Osama. Later Sadam. Now its a whole country, Iran. Well, maybe by next 2-10 years after Iran has been fully de-nucularized by our nukes, it would then be Syria, then the Saudis, while the constitution becomes more edited and tweaked, all in the name of killing the “monsters”.
Yeah. Tweaked by the all powerful Jews, who are here to let the world know that this nation was never to be named USA, but USI. Know what is, the United States of Israel. The run the country. No matter what you believe or disbelieve. We are just a big dobberman for them. They hold the leash.
January 17th, 2007 at 9:20 am“D’Souza argues that American Christians and traditionalists have more in common with moderate traditional Muslims than they may realize.” Kind of makes a point – the extreme right wing fundies of both religions are pretty much the same. That doesn’t make either of them right about anything, though.
January 17th, 2007 at 11:01 amThe Bush admin held just ONE cabinet-level counter-terrorism meeting just ONE week before the 9/11 attacks, while the Clinton admin had been holding THREE cabinet-level counter-terrorism meetings a week. Thus, in a comparable eight-month period, the Bush admin held just ONE meeting compared to close to ONE HUNDRED held by the outgoing Clinton admin.
And this ONE Bush meeting occurred during a time (in the summer of 2001 just before the 9/11 attacks) when strident alarm bells were going off in the U.S. counter-terrorism intelligence community about an impending al Qaeda terrorist attack that Osama bin Laden was “determined” to conduct inside the United States.
And D’Sousa’s claim that the liberal freedoms in our liberal culture in our liberal democracy are responsible for the al Qaeda attacks indicates that he is just a traitor to our democracy, and should be locked away for a long, long time in a cell beside Bush, Cheney, Falwell, Robertson, Dobson, and all the other neo-con-poops who hate our liberal democracy as much as Osama bin Laden does.
January 17th, 2007 at 11:55 amEvery time I turn around, neocons are agreeing with Al Qeada. It blows my mind that they don’t see it.
This is the pussiest crap I’ve ever heard coming from these people:
Yeah, the ’secular left’ were the ones dropping bombs on them.
This is the equivalent of ‘It’s not me you want to kill. It was that leftie. He went thattaway.’
What PUSSIES.
And so it’s right when they lob off heads for alleged adultery. It’s great when they kill you for shaving your beard.
And these people are?
Frankly, this is so laughable that I’ve gone into pre-emptive jaw dropping.
This book is quite ignorable.
Please ignore it from now on Think Progress.
January 17th, 2007 at 12:30 pmIt’s too stupid to deserve publicity.
I haven’t read this idiotic book, but I saw the author on The Colbert Report. His argument seemed to be this: liberals make America less safe because Muslim extremists like bin Laden hate our values and lifestyles, therefore we should become more like THEM to assuage their rage.
Great idea! If we would just let a Christian Taliban rule our culture and government, we’d be safe! Three cheers for liberty!
Why didn’t anyone think of this before?! What a genius.
Now go get a tissue and wipe the sarcasm off your screen.
January 17th, 2007 at 1:39 pmThe biggest difference has been that the Right-wing has taken a long-run view of the worldwide war on terror, while the left are seeking a quick fix. The Left need to understand a solution is a much higher standard than an idea. It’s pretty easy to have a good idea. But it takes a tremendous amount of work to take that idea and make it a solution. The Left claim that there is no connection between the war on terror and the war in Iraq. They don’t seem to notice that the terrorists themselves obviously see a clear connection, which they express in both words and deeds.
January 17th, 2007 at 1:44 pmTerrorists are pouring into Iraq, even at the cost of their lives, in order to prevent a free, democratic government from being established in the Middle East. They see victory or defeat in Iraq as having major and long-lasting repercussions throughout the region and even throughout the world.
“terrorists themselves obviously see a clear connection”
We should ask them where Osama is……….
January 17th, 2007 at 2:18 pmHave you been on extended trip to the space station? They have been attacking other Western Nations and it is because of our collective values or lack of.
Whoa, michael, as a european I most strongly protest the idea of “our collective values”.
January 17th, 2007 at 3:07 pmMan, I’m so glad I don’t live in the same country you live in, being brainwashed and stuff.
Me thinks “Think Progress” is not for “critical thinking” when the subject is 9-11, judging by my disappearing post!
January 17th, 2007 at 3:16 pmcriticalthinker sez:
Yup…TP has forbidden any discussion of the events of 9/11, on the grounds that such discussions tend to ‘hijack threads’.
It’s difficult enough discussing the general state of this country and the world without discussing 9/11…as I’ve said before numerous times, it’s like trying to discuss the fate of the Titanic without mentioning icebergs. But when you have a topic that involves 9/11, then trying to tiptoe around the issue becomes just plain ludicrous.
Nevertheless, TP continues to ‘disappear’ any posts that reference 9/11 Truth (especially posts with links to corroborating evidence), while allowing posts that cleave to the Official Version of Events and attack and ridicule 9/11 Truth to stand unchallenged.
It’s selective, unbalanced censorship, and it’s intellectually and morally dishonest. If TP was concerned about 9/11 posts hijacking the thread, they’d deal with all posts on the topic in the same manner. But that’s not what they’re concerned about.
So what are they concerned about? Try to submit posts regarding Zionism or AIPAC, and you’ll see them disappear just as quickly as 9/11 Truth posts. What does that tell you?
January 17th, 2007 at 3:40 pmHe makes sense. That’s why 9/11 happened in France and other western European countries with its proud display of sexuality in the media. That’s why the Netherlands were bombed by the Muslim community because they were gratuitously selling gay marriage to the world. Sure.
January 17th, 2007 at 4:41 pmIt is a site that purposely omits historical information that undermines the point it is trying to make.
‘I don’t know’ isn’t an omission. An omission would be it not being there.
Stop spinning Exley.
It is a site that has an agenda and then attempts to fit the facts to support a conclusion it has already made.
No. They said “Here’s our list – but don’t just believe us – find your own evidence.” People with integrity don’t say that.
This is evidenced by the fact that in discussing the Korean War it purposely omits information about the communist North Korean invasion of South Korea in 1950 and the fact that the military action on the Korean peninsula in 1950-53 was a United Nations operation.
It was omitted. You are either being intentionally dense here to annoy me, or you are not getting the fact that it is YOU who is in serious denial and trying desperately to rationalize your criticism of Juan with a lot of inconsequential nonsense when you obviously don’t have facts to refute him with…
Indeed, the Korean War example goes to root of the flaw in the Web site Unbelievable passed along. It provides no historical context.
Sadly, it makes the benefit of the doubt that you and others learned that part in high school World History…
It makes no reference to the larger global conflict that was taking place between 1945 and 1990; namely, the Cold War between the United States and the West and the communnist bloc led by the USSR.
Again, it can’t give you the entire history of the world. It left it up to you to become educated first. Tall order, I see…
The vast majority of the military actions listed on the site are directly related to the Cold War, such as U.S. aid to Greece anti-communists after World War II during the Greek Civil War, the aid to the Nicaraguan freedom fighters that ultimately defeat the communist Sandinista dictatorship, aid to the democratically elected government of Jose Napoleon Duarte in El Salvador to defeat the communist insurrection, etc.
Exley, this still has NOTHING to do with you PROVING your claims.
As we know, as a result of the U.S.’s actions against the communist bloc and the Soviet Union in those and other theaters ultimately led to communism’s defeat and freedom for millions of people who lived under communist oppression for since the early 20th century.
Exley – this is your OPINION. I haven’t seen you post one single FACT to defend your cliam that the US military actions have all been for National Defense.
Prove we were threatened by the Phillipines, Laos, Nicaragua, Iraq, etc. PROVE IT.
So, yes, Unbelievable, the vast majority, if not all of the post-World War II military actions were justified and, thankfully, ultimately successful. And the result was the defeat of communism, the most murderous, oppressive ideology in world history and subsequent freedom for millions of people.
Comment by Exley — January 16, 2007 @ 10:06 pm
“Give me PROOF” isn’t a ‘yes or no’ question…
Any chance you’ll get that?
January 17th, 2007 at 7:51 pmALL THE GUILTYS COME RIGHT BACK HERE TO DEFEND AGAINST IT
RIGHT ZOOEY ?
RIGHT ROBERT ?
RIGHT TRUEBLUE ?
RIGHT UNBELIEVABLE ?
Comment by careful now — January 16, 2007 @ 9:40 pm
First of all, I have a job and a life. I don’t live here. I come often, but do have other things to do. Therefore expecting me to read and responde to every post immediately is irrational.
Secondly, accusing people of crap that isn’t true is slander. Proof? One of the people with whom you accuse me of conspiring is not someone I like or who likes me. In fact we can’t stand one another. Much less conspire.
Thirdly, behaving this way won’t gain you friends. In fact, you’re assuring that people will snub you and not read your posts. The way to get friendship is by giving friendship. You’re on the wrong trail.
And lastly, please find a good therapist. For your own sake.
January 17th, 2007 at 7:58 pmFinally, someone got it right. The crazy left, yeah, you moonbats are to blame. I see all the christian bashing posts, yet where are the posts bashing the muslim religion? I have yet to hear a christian minister call for the killing of all homosexuals. Homosexuals are stoned to death by other religions. I have yet to hear any christian minister call for the death of all muslims because they do not believe. We are all targeted for death because we are “non belivers”.
We are at war with people that want us all dead. As a conservative, I hope that the democrats win in 2 years. That way the whole country will be onboard with the war on terror, not just the correct half.
January 18th, 2007 at 8:40 amInfidel – I’ll be happy to bash Christianity as much as you want. It’s no less sane than any other ridiculous ideology based on superstition and emotions with zero facts or proof. All religions are dangerous in the way they teach their followers to be sheep.
For the record, read any one of the Bibles (last count there were 32 versions in print) – it tells Christians to kill non-believers. And if you don’t realize how Bush’s war on Iraq is exactly that, then you are blinded by your own blind faith.
Feel better?
January 18th, 2007 at 5:44 pm86.
But they just keep on arguing….
January 18th, 2007 at 9:43 pmALL THE GUILTYS COME RIGHT BACK HERE TO DEFEND AGAINST IT
RIGHT ZOOEY ?
RIGHT ROBERT ?
RIGHT TRUEBLUE ?
RIGHT UNBELIEVABLE ?
Comment by careful now — January 16, 2007 @ 9:40 pm
Hey “rachel b”, “rachel b blair”, “careful now”, “porcupiny” how many names do you use? Who pays you to disrupt this site? You say that Zooey and others are in some way complicit at hacking this site and some how redirect post somewhere else? If you have proof how did they do it? DNS injection? ARP poisoning? Man-in-the-middle attack? Zero day exploit? Explain to all of us how this supposedly was perpetrated. This is the third thread I have seen you use a different name to try and make zooey and others look bad regarding this. The reason I know its you, because of your syntax. Robert was probably you as well. I seen the comment he made and it doesn’t flow in sentence form, instead it’s choppy line by line.
Anyway, I’m in contact with parent company of TP, because I take allegations of IP hijacking very seriously. We will get to the bottom of this and I hope it’s a hoax, but won’t know until it’s investigated.
Even if your using an anonymous server or proxy to hide your IP that’s only good for the first time, because a pattern can be done to match the logs of this server to the down stream routers….
January 18th, 2007 at 9:47 pm