idrankwhat

1) If you look at a different source you'll get a more balanced representation of his chest thumping. My guess is that he wouldn't need to attack Pakistan. Withdrawing the $20 million or so we give them every month might get the desired results. 2)No, this doesn't sound like Bush/Cheney. They would prefer to attack Venezuela than to pursue the al Qaeda leadership where it actually is. 3)Yes, attacking Iraq was the worst possible blunder if you're really talking about the "war" on terror. Continuing the attack on al Qaeda from Afghanistan into Pakistan would have made much more sense. You're going where the enemy is, not attacking the middle east country with the least ties to terrorism. Hell, al Qaeda has done more training in the US than it did in Iraq before the invasion. 4)No, I'm not calling for an invasion of Pakistan but it is nice to hear some of our leaders publicly acknowledge that we're in the wrong theater. Hmmm....maybe some sort of Ron Paul/Obama ticket might be the ticket

Someone must have spiked his Wheaties with dumbassitol.

I can't actually comment on the current Fox report. I quit watching all that crap a couple of years ago. I got tired of yelling at my own TV equipment. It's not the TV's fault. But for your commentary on the commentators, I agree with you completely. You can always turn down the volume when the ladies come on and put on some seventies chickachickawowwow music. It's fun, less frustrating and it's just as informative as if you were listening to what they were saying

Is it easier to ignore than address? NOT ONE SINGLE DAM RESPONSE TO THIS VIDEO! WHATS THE DEAL? IS IT TOO F&*%ING REAL????? you will have to wait for the add to end You're absolutely right. We should kill all children.

This shows one of my biggest problem with this sort of "news" programming. It's not "news". It's editorial programming.

This is more deliciously tempting than the "history eraser button". The shiny, red, CANDY LIKE button!

How are you supposed to bite the head off of a cabbage? You'd have to pop the whole cookie in your mouth at once. You'd look like a gluttonous pig. Mmmmm. Pig. Now THERE's something you can dismember.

Probably just a short dip. But it's hard to say exactly how the mortgage lending problems are going to eventually pan out. I actually made money yesterday so I'll be jumping out of planes instead of windows. edited to add while watching the market near today's close: Ok, maybe not that many times

I don't ignore it. It gets plenty of attention so I try to point out the part that doesn't. They weren't clashing with the police. That was one of the points I was trying to make. But the only difference between a bus blowing up civilians and bombing civilians with a fighter jet is that in one case, the war criminal is not around to repeat their crime. Nothing to do with them? Who pays for the settlement building and the settlers who live there? http://www.usip.org/pubs/usipeace_briefings/2006/0810_aid_palestine.html That's a pretty good article.

Yep. End it. Last year was the 15th consecutive year that the UN has almost unanimously voted to condemn the embargo. I'm not sure who really wants it to continue anyway and I think NC's right. I think it's more about saving face.

err, the fact that one is and one isn't? That depends on your perspective. From a third party perspective, there's not a lot of difference. See the attached pictures. The only difference is that when Palestinians do it those guys in the green outfits shoot, beat or arrest them.

Yes it did. Sorry. http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0WDQ/is_2002_Dec_9/ai_95100420/pg_1

http://www.saudiembassy.net/2004News/News/IslDetail.asp?cIndex=3785 http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/3059365.stm http://www.islamfortoday.com/adi08.htm http://www.islamfortoday.com/mat01.htm "Hijacking Planes, terrorizing innocent people and shedding blood constitute a form of injustice that can not be tolerated by Islam, which views them as gross crimes and sinful acts." Shaykh Abdul Aziz al-Ashaikh, Grand Mufti of Saudi Arabia and Chairman of the Senior Ulama, on September 15th, 2001 "The terrorists acts, from the perspective of Islamic law, constitute the crime of hirabah (waging war against society)." September 27, 2001 - Fatwa, signed by: Shaykh Yusuf al-Qaradawi, Grand Islamic Scholar and Chairman of the Sunna and Sira Countil, Qatar Judge Tariq al-Bishri, First Deputy President of the Council d'etat, Egypt Dr. Muhammad s. al-Awa, Professor of Islamic Law and Shari'a, Egypt Dr. Haytham al-Khayyat, Islamic scholar, Syria Fahmi Houaydi, Islamic scholar, Syria Shaykh Taha Jabir al-Alwani, Chairman, North America High Council "Neither the law of Islam nor its ethical system justify such a crime." Zaki Badawi, Principal of the Muslim College in London. Cited in Arab News, September 28, 2001. "It is wrong to kill innocent people. It is also wrong to praise those who kill innocent people." Mufti Nizamuddin Shamzai, Pakistan. Cited in the New York Times, September 28, 2001. "What these people stand for is completely against all the principles that Arab Muslims believe in." King Abdullah II, of Jordan; cited in the Middle East Times, September 28, 2001.

Your programming is complete. Dear benevolent and loving God, please bless this warrior so that he might send someone to smash his enemies to tiny bits, at thy mercy, and to give him the strength to vote for whichever pro-war candidate that prophet Limbaugh doth deem fit for endorsement. Amen. You're usually much more objective. Mocking those who point out the intolerance of (more than just a fringe group of) Muslims, smacks of ignorance. I've tried respectful, objective dialog, and I'm sure that I'll do it again. But what is it that they say is the definition of insanity, doing exactly the same thing over and over again and expecting a different result? Plus, this is SC and every once in a while each one of us succumbs to the temptation to flame. Doing it without getting banned is the trick.

Your programming is complete. Dear benevolent and loving God, please bless this warrior so that he might send someone to smash his enemies to tiny bits, at thy mercy, and to give him the strength to vote for whichever pro-war candidate that prophet Limbaugh doth deem fit for endorsement. Amen. Wow, are we not insulting today. And just because someone does not agree with your self proclaimed correctness It was your dismissal of Paul's quotes as "insignificant" and that those ideas are trying to "distract us from the REAL reasons" that put me into mock mode. Just try answering the question that Ron Paul asked. What would you do if China was building bases, bombing us and occupying our cities?

Your programming is complete. Dear benevolent and loving God, please bless this warrior so that he might send someone to smash his enemies to tiny bits, at thy mercy, and to give him the strength to vote for whichever pro-war candidate that prophet Limbaugh doth deem fit for endorsement. Amen.

I don't have any problem retaliating against people who do me or my family harm. I do have a problem retaliating against people who simply look like the people who did me harm.

No, they don't. "Reason" implies logic. mh . And mental mechanisms like dehumanization make killing and oppression easier to justify.

That's the viewpoint that may make you feel better but it is disastrously incomplete. Ron Paul's comments: "Have you ever read about the reasons they attacked us? They attack us because we've been over there. We've been bombing Iraq for 10 years. We've been in the Middle East. I think Reagan was right: we don't understand the irrationality of Middle-Eastern politics. So right now, we're building an embassy in Iraq that's bigger than the Vatican, we're building 14 permanent bases. What would we say here if China was doing this in our country or in the Gulf of Mexico? We would be objecting. We need to look at what we do from the perspective of what would happen if somebody else did it to us........ ...I believe very sincerely that the CIA is correct when they teach and talk about blowback. When we went into Iran in 1953 and installed the Shah, yes, there was blowback. The reaction to that was the taking of our hostages. And that persists. And if we ignore that, we ignore that at our own risk. If we think that we can do what we want around the world and not incite hatred, then we have a problem. They don't come here to attack us because we're rich and we're free. They come and they attack us because we're over there. I mean, what would we think if other foreign countries were doing that to us?"

Curious, what's the difference between SH financing Palestinian terrorists and the US financing Israeli terrorists?

And if you're ok with the Iraq war and for the Middle East nation building project for that reason then you've got a lot of company. Wolfowitz, Pearle, Rumsfeld, Cheney, Feith, Bush, etc. But to answer your next question, no. I don't have a problem with the US coming to the aid of an ally who is under attack. However if that ally is failing to do what we require of them and is helping to provoke the fight, then I'm inclined to withdraw my support until they cut it out. Then, when they complied with our agreements I would have absolutely no problem using excessive military force to insure that they stayed secure.

A worthy sentiment, Bill, but it ignores the fact that the islamo-fascist whackos who are trying to kill us don't have reason in their lexicon, ... That's a perfect example of the fear that we're talking about. They have reasons to want to attack us, and they have told us what they are. Ask Ron Paul if you don't believe me. He's the only one in Washington who seems to be able to admit it out loud.

Now you believe it's wrong for Israel to support war against a nation (not a loosely formed military group) that threatened to send chemical weapons and did launch Scuds, and gave money to the families of suicide bombers? I thought we were talking about US Presidents, not Israel. But see how easy it is to fail to distinguish between the two? That was my point. When Jesus said turn the other cheek, you really did swallow the coolade. I can see you're still annoyed about the preconceptions that I strained last week. Gray's a bitch. Black and white is so much easier. So how big is the "second largest population of Jews in the Middle East," anyway? About 30,000. About the same as in Italy.

Just thought I'd point out that, besides the Jewish MP in Iran's parliament, Iran has the second largest population of Jews in the middle east. And I don't think that the problem is with a Jewish president. A pro Iraq war Zionist president, definitely.

I hadn't heard about the chemicals but we did sell him some helicopters for "agricultural" use. He was our buddy until about 2 years after he gassed the Kurds. Then we really got mad about him gassing them 14 years later.