Trent

Was ANYONE in the World Trade Center involved in violent miltary operations against Al Qaeda or any arab nation for that matter? So in that matter, yes... they were innocent. You think I'm mad? Is that a personal attack? You're trying to turn a valid agument into one over semantics. That's a lame thing to do. So you DO think that all Iraqis and foreign terrorists in Iraq who have been killed were innocent? I guess that's the end of this conversation then. Is it beyond reason to think that these numbers not only include civilians, but militants, terrorists, Iraqi military, and.... hmmm pretty much anyone who went to a hospital or morgue? Seriously... you seem to question everything... why not question these numbers too? Oh, that's right... it doesn't work for your argument. Oh, hello again!

I count 6,396 (from the Minimum column) from January 2003 to September 2003. Gee, those are all those aggregate numbers I was talking about. You know the ones from "reports" and "witnesses"... who are so accurate with counting that the numbers vary in some cases by the 100's? Oh, but they're from hospitals you say... and morgues? Do you think that every person in those hospitals is an innocent civilian? Do you think that every body in the morgue is an innocent civilian? I know that's what sites like this want us to believe... but do you? Really? Distantly, as in fighting alongside them in Afghanistan? It is people who hold opinions like yours that suggest Bush is scum. I suggest that he shouldn't have to apologize for every death in a war. People do die in wars, hopefully more of "them" than "us" that's the point. No one likes when real civilians are killed. But let's not forget the cause of this conflict was Saddam's government. Yeah yeah, I know... you want to blame in on the oil hungry Bush meister-plan... but seriously.... Oh, hello again!

http://www.iraqbodycount.net/bodycount.htm Go tell me there aren't any US Soldier casualties in there. Go ahead... go look. Now go look at the sources for the BIG numbers. They usually come from "estimates" or "reports" or people who "suspect". Now did you really go look? Really? How many of those deaths are likely caused be the terroristic islamic militants? Look at the 'Target' and 'Weapon' columns and make an educated guess as to who is responsible. Now what? You mean they weren't fighting the Russians because they'd been invaded? So the mujahideen is a US creation? Damn, maybe we shoulda called it something easier to pronounce then. But he was a big 'ol US funded Mujahid, right? So go ahead and lay the blame for September 11th on the US too, while you're at it. So when do we get apologies from the families and clerics that have sent their zealots to kill innocents? Or do your standards only apply to Bush. Oh, hello again!

Actually, Bill, go look closer... that number. It includes US Soldier deaths, Iraqi police deaths, militant deaths, Iraqi regular army deaths, and civilian deaths. I've done it... go take the time to do it yourself. So let's blame the US. Hell, we should blame the school system for all the murders in the US. Why not? It makes as much sense as your accusation. So, you're saying that it is OUR fault that islamic extremism is the racist, fascist, despicably violent culture that it is? Since you're still just trying to be inflammatory... Hey, we gave our government hundreds of billions of dollars in taxes for the military. We let our military train on *gasp* how to fight a war. Should we ask the head of the military to apologize for doing their jobs? Oh, hello again!

Bill, go to even one of the left's iraqi body count sites and find me the 7,000 "innocent" people that Bush killed. I did a quick scan of the www.iraqbodycount.com count and came up with a lot of suspected militant deaths and civilian and iraqi police deaths at the hands of these militants. Now before you come back with your version of the count, look at the sources and circumstances of some of the "counted" numbers. Since we're just going to be inflammatory... do you think the leading clerics of Islam will apologize for the 3,000 dead in NY or the hundreds of thousand dead over the decades of terrorism and extremism that they failed to contain themselves? Oh, hello again!

Actually, prior to 2000-2001... it was mainly Chechen muslims in a fight with the Russian gov't for an independent state. Since then their ranks have been filled with "arab" fighters that had nothing better to do, many of whom came from Afghanistan. You actually used to be able to see a timeline on their now defunct website, kavkaz.com or qoqaz.net. There was a definite change in their motivation and strategy as a result of the "arab" muslim presence. Oh, hello again!

Am I the only one that thinks that the world press should NOT run stories and distribute the video and demands of people taking hostages like this? Unless that stops, they will keep taking hostages and killing them because it brings them attention. I'll argue that allowing these stories to run is detrimental to the safety of all military and civilians in the middle east. This isn't about free speech. Al-Jazeera should be shut down every time it THINKS about running these stories. Go ahead and tell me I'm unAmerican for wanting to limit free speech. Tell me that people have a right to know what's going on. Then realize you're putting a news-story ahead of the rights of the people who have been, and will be kidnapped. Oh, hello again!

You know, about 6 years ago, I actually had some sympathy for the Chechens... then their resistance was overtaken by more radical islamic arabs, who are drawn to any excuse to kill non-muslims. Since then... 2001 or so ... they have become more of the increasingly large pile of dogshit that plagues our world. In reading the article, I think it is sad... and in the long-run, self-defeating... that the parents of the kids are immediately blaming Putin and demanding he give into the demands. Yes, I can understand wanting the hostages out at all costs... but 100% of the justified anger needs to be directed at this form of radical islam. An event such as this should be enough to have the world want to destroy this form of zealotry wherever they find it. Disgusting. Oh, hello again!

Yeah, except that I was in NY and saw the gigantic fire and destruction. Not to mention that I was on the phone with a friend at the WTC who said it was a big passenger jet. Low clouds. Oh, hello again!

Not to Drew really, but I wanted to say it.... NO, GWB does not flip flop... he changes his stance based on new information. It is a sign of intelligence and open-mindedness. OH WAIT, that defense only works if it's used for Kerry, right? If Bush does it, it's a Flip-Flop. Oh, hello again!

Yes, I knew it was a terrorist attack. That was my first thought. How does a passenger plane hit the WTC? After the second plane, did anyone have any questions that it was terrorism? As for Bush's response, I was proud he was our president when he spoke to the country and came to visit NY. He and Giuliani made all of us in NY at the time feel some measure of comfort at the response from the country and the world. Oh, hello again!

When you're teaching someone to freefly, giving them specific, observable positions does actually help. Beginners have little idea as to what their bodies should feel like in the HD position, much like as a first jump student, you didn't know much what it would be like to be stable on your belly and controlling heading and fall rate with your body. After your instructor put you in a stable position and gave you fundamentals about how to control your body... you probably started to feel it for yourself and adapted to what was more efficient/comfortable for yourself. I know I fly VERY differently now on my belly than I did as a student. It is similar for freeflying in that you want to give students the fundamentals so that they can get a feel for how it works, then let them really fly it. Learning some fundamentals really helps speed up learning later, I think. It's like that hierarchy of learning... the lowest form is memorization (of body position) and it progresses to understanding (which is what Vertifly is talking about in his last post). Oh, hello again!

At least Bush SAYS he doesn't approve of the 527's. And I won't use it to blast Kerry any more than to say that they should not open their whining mouths when they're doing the same things. It isn't Kerry's fault these guys were working outside the campaign... unless he was supporting them in doing it. Same goes for Bush. Oh, hello again!

Yes, he does have a full page devoted to his war-heroness, and another one with SOME of his citations for medals, including the first purple heart that is questionable even by his supporters, and the last two that happened less than a month apart. And let's not forget that over a million Vietnam veterans DO care about his service records since he decided to play hero after lambasting him once he was safe back in the US. People DO have reason to care about this issue... and it wouldn't have been an issue if JFK hadn't let his campaign make it one. Oh, hello again!

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,130091,00.html ... on the dangers of mixing money and ignorance. http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,130090,00.html ... something I think a lot of us on either side think is total bullshit. Yeah, I know they're from Fox, but I just wanted to share. Don't yell at me. Oh, hello again!

I dunno Bill, maybe they didn't bother to speak up because they just wanted to let things lie in order to get past it ... but when someone started tooting his own horn to get elected, they felt that they had to say something about the man they saw as unfit to be president. Just a thought. Oh, hello again!

So... Bush supporters have some extracurricular activites? Wow. Gee who woulda thought that someone who is on the Bush campaign might be a veteran with something to say about Kerry's questionable military service? Either way, my point was that if you play dirty you're going to get dirty. Both campaigns probably have at least a small hand in all the 527's, not excluding golden-boy Kerry, who has just learned what it is like to be on the other side of their attacks. Oh well. Like I said before, Kerry made his service and his medals an issue. There are people who DO care what happened 30 years ago because they were there. The issue needs to be resolved one way or the other, but it is a bed of his own making. Oh, hello again!

But what do you think about the issue brought up by the cartoon? You don't want to make Ron right when he says something like about you, do you? Oh, hello again!

Technically, it's not Bush/Cheney making those attacks. So those attacks are coming from other volunteers... until the next great scandal is uncovered, right? I'll tell you who cares... the people that went to Vietnam voluntarily. The people who went to Vietnam when they were drafted. The people who saw what was happening while they were there and believed they were fighting for the right reasons. The people who did incredibly heroic things for their fellow soldiers and people of South Vietnam and didn't get medals for it, or did get medals and never spoke of it again because it was their job. The families of people who never came home might care that someone is being touted as a war hero, when all they have is a framed set of medals to remind them of their loved one. Yeah, people DO care... whether you like it or not. Somewhere in the middle of the Dem effort to make Kerry the great leader and war hero and the efforts of the SBVFT, there is the truth. I'd love to know what it is so we can at least focus on the fact that Kerry has no real policy plans or even reasonable ideas for them. Kallend Says: That is the only reasonable argument I've heard from the left/dems/whatever to vote for Kerry. I can accept that as a reason someone would vote for these 2 clowns, at least its more honest than the other BS you hear. Oh, hello again!

How about when morons doing stupid shit jeopardizes an entire sport? How about when shitheads do something so stupid and in front of the wrong people that it gets our sport some scrutiny from FAA or others who might think it needs to be more strictly regulated? I guess we should just let people do all the stupid shit they want, because then, the decision on what should and should not be done will be out of our hands and we can all bitch together instead of at each other. Right? Oh, hello again!

Maybe we could set up a network for people who want to die, and serial killers who just can't help but kill people. That way, no one really loses and we keep things under control. They could have, "Kill Me Farms" or something. Oh, hello again!

But it sure was sad to see so many people running up to them telling them how cool it was. I think the group over at the freefly tent was one of the only groups to verbally express to them that they are candidates for the "dumbass of the year" award. Stupid stunt with stupidly low experience. Oh, hello again!

Look Philly, really... you're a great opposite for some of us here on the forum, and I always like your posts, even when they're wrong... but really, how can you not see what we're talking about here. Kerry called for a clean campaign and focus on making america better, then he went and used what people accuse Bush of doing to make him seem a better option. It was a thinly veiled shot at him and you know it. I mentioned that I saw it that way, and you brought up how GWB had dirty ads. We weren't talking about that. People here are always saying something along the lines of "is your only justification for GWB something that you think Clinton did bad?" You kinda did the same thing here. Either way, it's not that big of a deal. Kerry and Co will probably run the rest of the campaign this way... not being overtly critical of Bush, but getting their shots in under the table. That's psychology... they think it'll get them votes... and it may. Oh, hello again!

Find where I have ever commented on Bush's ads. You're using the "... but but but... Bush is doing it tooo!" argument again. I thought we were silly for doing that with Clinton, but here you are doing it with Bush. Regardless... unless you're purposely being difficult, or haven't been paying attention to what is being said about Bush in the last year, it is impossible to see Kerry's statements as anything but a REALLY REALLY thinly veiled attack on Bush. And, yes, it does directly attack him, even though he never mentions a name. Come on, Kev... you know what it was... your blind support of Kerry is starting to look like the blind support you think Bush supporters have. Oh, hello again!

But Jr has never hidden the fact that he was a liberal. Don't you remember his (deservedly) short-lived tv show? That was a long time ago... Sometimes people just can't see the light, no matter how close to it they are... Oh, hello again!