Debate and Discussion

"They hate freedom"
bobhhh at 8:17AM, Jan. 13, 2008
(offline)
posts: 893
joined: 5-12-2007
Fercrissakes.

I always hear how Bush is not much worse than other presidents. This guy is without equal. Yesterday he stood up in the United Arab Emirates and declared to their oppressive princes that other Arab countries needed to embrace democracy.

He then went on to repeat the big lie that terrorists hate freedom. This is meant to dehumanize them and curry favor with the American public for his middle east agression.

When was the last time anybody bought this crap? Have we become so callous that we just accept the fact that Bush lies between his teeth and never has to account for it? If this was Clinton he would have to appear before the open senate for lying about unzipping his fly.

I have to wonder why doesn't somebody, say Sam Donaldson(he was always on the tarmac yelling questions at Reagan), have the balls to say something like, "They hate freedom!?!?!? Really now Mr. President, isn't it possible they hate us because we keep fucking up their countries for the sake of cheap oil? Isn't possible that people strap bombs to their chests because they feel they have no other way of driving us out of their countries? Isn't it possible that they love freedom, but it's freedom from our meddling that they truly are fighting for? Aren't the terrorists just doing what we would do if an occupying force of far greater military strength descended upon us?

When is somebody going to call Bush on his bullshit and force him to answer a straight question honestly?
My name is Bob and I approved this signature.
last edited on July 14, 2011 11:29AM
Phantom Penguin at 9:01AM, Jan. 13, 2008
(offline)
posts: 1,075
joined: 1-6-2006
Because hes the president, no one is going to make him answer anything. And besides, who thinks anything he says is the truth anyway? I mean hes been president for almost 8 years now you would think people would be smarter then that. Or be so use to it they wouldn't really care anymore.

Is he trying to sway opinion? I think even he at this point knows thats no going to happen. But if he changes his speeches he will just be admitting hes wrong, which is something no president will ever do.
last edited on July 14, 2011 2:42PM
ozoneocean at 9:01AM, Jan. 13, 2008
(online)
posts: 24,946
joined: 1-2-2004
Yeah, that “Hate Freedom” line obviously doesn't mean what you'd normally think those two words would mean. It's the old fashioned Orwellian “doublespeak”. :(

But not only that, it's become a slogan… It IS true in one sense though; those who'd like to see Bush jnr stopped hate him being free to keep on doing that crap. :)

The other aspect of it is that for the idiots who don't know what the terrorists want, and for people like Bush Jnr who's motive is to mislead people about the terrorists; fatuous, empty and hilariously moronic lines like “Hate Freedom” are an easy out.

And for those unthinking troglodytes… well to me they're one small level above the terrorists and on the same level as paedophiles and gay-bashers: Unthinking morons are the reason the world lurches into these stupid conflicts, without their support and THEIR unreasoning HATE and lack of understanding of anything but their own needs, the great democracies of the world wouldn't be able to launch or sustain these demonic crusades.


…oh man, I was in full flight there! Someone needs to come and shoot me down with the hypocrisy AA guns. ^__^
 
last edited on July 14, 2011 2:29PM
StaceyMontgomery at 11:16AM, Jan. 13, 2008
(offline)
posts: 520
joined: 4-7-2007
I do not wish to give the President a free pass here, but anyone who fights for oppressive theocracy does, in fact, Hate Freedom.

I would happily argue that Al Qaeda members and their allies hate freedom. They hate it very much.

Of course, the US President is saying “they attack us because we are free” and that is not why they attack us.

Still, I have to say, anyone who wants to burn down the world and replace it with a mighty Caliphate does, in fact, hate Freedom.

Of course, so does Newt Gingrich and his pals - who recently argued that it was time to limit the first Amendment.
http://www.nysun.com/article/44302

Any opponent of free speech and habeas Corpus, anyone who thinks that torture is a Good Thing - they are also enemies of freedom.


It seems to me that everyone wants to be free - you become an enemy of Freedom when you do not wish for other people to be Free.
last edited on July 14, 2011 3:55PM
ozoneocean at 2:47PM, Jan. 13, 2008
(online)
posts: 24,946
joined: 1-2-2004
StaceyMontgomery
It seems to me that everyone wants to be free - you become an enemy of Freedom when you do not wish for other people to be Free.
That would be the leadership of every country that I could think off… And a good proportion of everybody else a lot of the time: Many people tend to think that people in other countries should be free to live the way that they think they should live.

And terrorists? Well only a proportion of them want theocracy, and even then that's a sort of “freedom”. Theocracy, democracy, aristocracy, whatever, all impose rules on how you should live your life, think, dress etc. That's just how systems of government are. We simplify based on our own perspectives, but the fact is that it's all relative and out of the democracies in the world, very few have all the nice lovely dovey “freedoms” that we like so much. -add to that the fact that religious terrorists fighting against the Saudi, Egyptian, and Syrian governments for example really and truly ARE fighting for freedom to practise their religious ways, as well as more freedom in their daily lives etc. lol!

So, yeah, the “they hate our freedom” is always a stupid line.

In fact the very reasons for acts like world Trade Centre attack were because of a perception that the US is oppressing “Freedom” in those middle Eastern countries; the freedom for them to choose their own governments, systems of government or whatever.

It goes around in circles of tragic hilarity. :(
 
last edited on July 14, 2011 2:29PM
spacehamster at 3:05PM, Jan. 13, 2008
(online)
posts: 504
joined: 8-3-2007
Little known fact: Freedom knocked up the terrorists' sisters and called their mothers whores. That's why they hate it.

See, it all makes perfect sense.
last edited on July 14, 2011 3:50PM
an_artist at 3:21AM, Jan. 14, 2008
(offline)
posts: 12
joined: 6-12-2007
Saying that all terrorist bombers are religious fanatics because they pray to Allah before blowing themselves apart is like saying the US military is a religious organisation because the troops often pray, and the address to the troops often involves some kind of mention of God and how he blesses their actions/will protect them, etc. It's just dehumanisation propaganda. If you say your enemy is a fanatic who cannot be reasoned with, who follows a religion that is the antithesis of freedom and goodness, it's easy to justify blowing them apart.

Look at it this way - what's the difference between Al-Qaeda saying that Allah has told them to kill the infidels, and Bush saying in public addresses that God has told him that war in the middle-east is OK?

Terrorists are flinging themselves at us while wearing explosives because we blew 100,000 or so Iraqi civilians up during the First Gulf War, and continue to do so through this war.
last edited on July 14, 2011 10:54AM
mlai at 4:48AM, Jan. 14, 2008
(online)
posts: 3,035
joined: 12-28-2006
an_artist
Terrorists are flinging themselves at us while wearing explosives because we blew 100,000 or so Iraqi civilians up during the First Gulf War, and continue to do so through this war.
Terrorists have been throwing themselves at the USA since before the Gulf War. It's a complicated issue, with fault lying squarely in 1st-World policies. Iraq doesn't help, but it's not the main factor.

FIGHT current chapter: Filling In The Gaps
FIGHT_2 current chapter: Light Years of Gold
last edited on July 14, 2011 2:06PM
RabbitMaster at 5:03AM, Jan. 14, 2008
(online)
posts: 129
joined: 5-26-2007
I voted for President Bush, twice, so I suupose it's all my fault. But as a libertarian he has really fallen out of favor with me in the last 3 years or so. Although I support the idea of the war on terror, I find myself quite troubled by most of the things done under the guise of ‘protecting us’. So where does that leave me?

“Perhaps you would care to try your villany on a less defenseless opponent?”–Kung Fu Rabbit
last edited on July 14, 2011 2:57PM
StaceyMontgomery at 5:52AM, Jan. 14, 2008
(offline)
posts: 520
joined: 4-7-2007
Rabbitmaster

It is important to understand that the two sides have picked each other.

It is well documented that when the Bush administration came into power, they sat down and chose between two potential enemies. Shall it be the Jihadists or China? They had to pick one, because they understood that their objectives (that is, to politically isolate their opponents and home and broadly strengthen executive powers) very much needed an enemy -a new “USSR” to fight against.

Being too dim to read the Intel reports from the Clinton administration, they chose China. Then 9/11 came and they had to regroup. But it was just what they were looking for - an opportunity to work with a free hand and show us all how it's done. Goodbye habeas corpus, hello torture and eavesdroppping.

Of course, Bin Laden had the same goal. In order to get political change going in the Arab world, he needed the US to become more aggressive - and a strong terror strike at the US would do that.

Look, just read Bin-Laden's writing on this topic. He was very clear about what he was going to do, and why he was going to do it. He wanted the US to attack and occupy more arab territory. he wanted the price of oil to go way up. He wanted the “arab street” to feel empowered against the US.

So far, both sides have gotten exactly what they wanted.

I do not for a moment claim that Bin-Laden or President Bush really represent their people - but they have both done a good job of raising fears and passions.

But the fact is, The President wants a long, extended problem in the middle east, which he sees as mirroring the long, extended struggle with the USSR - if you want to get Americans to give up freedoms, you have to give them a real enemy.

And in the same way, Bin-Laden very much needs war all over the Arab world. Normal people do not become suicide bombers when things are good - they do it when they are scared and desperate. They need an enemy to hate.

Having said that…

… I want to disagree with a tone i seem to pick up here that because we can similarities between two groups (like Bush and Bin-Laden) that we cannot draw distinctions. But i say, we can and must draw those distinctions. Look, i am a Queer person and while george bush is no friend to Queer people, I much prefer to live under him than under Bin-Laden. To say that Al-Qaeda is not a bunch of Religious fanatics is to rather willfully look away.

Al-Qaeda is a millennialist cult - they seek to act as provocateurs, egging “both sides” on in order to create war and strife. It is always bad when someone decides that “the end of the world” is a Good Thing. We've had troubles with millennial cults in the US as well - thankfully, on a smaller scale so far.

But I think it is a mistake to equate a millennial cult with legitimate political interests. Arab people's have lots of legitimate political interests and problems. But I do not think any of those had much to do with 9/11 - anymore than I think that giving up Habeas Corpus somehow made me safer.
last edited on July 14, 2011 3:55PM
imshard at 6:33AM, Jan. 14, 2008
(online)
posts: 2,961
joined: 7-26-2007
creek=yes paddle=no

We could very much make this another partisan thread but I'll decline to do so. We really are dealing with a Theocracy vs Democracy issue here. Its not news. The “War on Terror” is a misnomer. If it were just terrorists we would not be invading countries. We would also include other terrorist groups around the world instead of just Al-Qaeda or the Taliban. No this is a specific fight against certain Muslim groups that declared war on religious grounds.

They really do want to destroy anybody who is not them for not participating in their version of Islam. A holy war has been declared on the bulk of the world population simply because they follow a different religion, or worse the wrong version of the same religion. The US is not the only target. Teachers in Thailand are attacked for not teaching religious texts, The Philippines are fighting muslim rebels for its right to exist, and China has been fighting al-qaeda and its subsidiary groups within its borders for years.

They honestly hate any country with the freedom, because countries with real honest to goodness freedom rarely choose to be strict Islamic states. Furthermore free countries allow people to worship as they see fit. So yes in a way, they do hate freedom. Just not the way we think of it in the USA. I don't think it is indicative of the populous and I know for a fact that it is not the majority view of Arabic, Islamic, or even middle eastern populations. Still, under a polarizing stimulus like a warzone or a gun to the head, even peaceful tolerant people are forced to pick a side and grab a gun of their own.
Don't be a stick in the mud traditionalist! Support global warming!

Tech Support: The Comic!! Updates Somedays!!
last edited on July 14, 2011 12:58PM
RabbitMaster at 6:40AM, Jan. 14, 2008
(online)
posts: 129
joined: 5-26-2007
With all due respect, I do not beleive that there was as much pre-planning behind it all as you say. Obviously 9-11 wasn't the first attack on our country by radical islamicists, but it was the first one we decided to deal with seriously (for example, I was in the military and in Pakistan when the base in Suadi Arabia was attacked. 19 Air Force personnel died and we did nothing about it) and it needed to be dealt with.
I feel like strategy was three-fold and legitimate. 1. Attack their training bases militarily 2. Disrupt their finances 3. Find a way to deal with state sponsors of terrorism, diplomatically where possible, militarily where necessary.
Notice that none of those three things involve warrantless wire-tapping of American citizens, draconian ‘Patriot Act’ legislation, expansion of government surveillance powers or other such abuses. So to be very specific in my criticism of the Bush administration, I do not approve of the growth of government power in the wake of 9/11. It seems ludicrous to say we are ‘fighting for freedom’ and then passing as many laws as you can get away with in the meantime. Not only is it ludicrous, it's dishonest.

“Perhaps you would care to try your villany on a less defenseless opponent?”–Kung Fu Rabbit
last edited on July 14, 2011 2:57PM
ozoneocean at 6:55AM, Jan. 14, 2008
(online)
posts: 24,946
joined: 1-2-2004
imshard
????
That's a mischaracterisation and utter nonsense. I'm bored of that approach… It involves lots of missing memories and remaking of reality.

Your scary terrorists are a bunch of scattered, ineffective groups with limited power to do anything. When they DO make big, nasty attacks it's only through sheer luck, and years of planning that it actually works. -The bombing of the USS Cole, the World Trade Centre attacks…

There's no “theocracy” here. You're roping in Iran which has nothing to do with anything and maybe the hopes of individual political activist groups for their OWN homelands. That's pretty stupid.

If you go into other people's countries, invade and slaughter, and you happen to get attacked by some organised terrorist groups as well as the native resistance forces, militias or whatever else, well that's just to be expected I'm afraid.

Sheesh… Democracy VS Theocracy? F**k. I can't wait for the Russians to get back to strength again so we have someone at least worthy of inventing as an evil boogeyman once more. These paper-tigers are getting dog eared lol!
 
last edited on July 14, 2011 2:29PM
lefarce at 7:29AM, Jan. 14, 2008
(online)
posts: 5,454
joined: 2-9-2006
bobhhh
Fercrissakes.

I always hear how Bush is not much worse than other presidents. This guy is without equal. Yesterday he stood up in the United Arab Emirates and declared to their oppressive princes that other Arab countries needed to embrace democracy.

He then went on to repeat the big lie that terrorists hate freedom. This is meant to dehumanize them and curry favor with the American public for his middle east agression.

When was the last time anybody bought this crap? Have we become so callous that we just accept the fact that Bush lies between his teeth and never has to account for it? If this was Clinton he would have to appear before the open senate for lying about unzipping his fly.

I have to wonder why doesn't somebody, say Sam Donaldson(he was always on the tarmac yelling questions at Reagan), have the balls to say something like, "They hate freedom!?!?!? Really now Mr. President, isn't it possible they hate us because we keep fucking up their countries for the sake of cheap oil? Isn't possible that people strap bombs to their chests because they feel they have no other way of driving us out of their countries? Isn't it possible that they love freedom, but it's freedom from our meddling that they truly are fighting for? Aren't the terrorists just doing what we would do if an occupying force of far greater military strength descended upon us?

When is somebody going to call Bush on his bullshit and force him to answer a straight question honestly?

Sounds like your typical spin, nothing out of the ordinary. Our country has been enforcing beliefs on others and attempting to dehumanize large groups of people since conception. Nothing new.

 
last edited on July 14, 2011 1:32PM
imshard at 7:55AM, Jan. 14, 2008
(online)
posts: 2,961
joined: 7-26-2007
ozoneocean
imshard
????
That's a mischaracterisation and utter nonsense. I'm bored of that approach… It involves lots of missing memories and remaking of reality.

Your scary terrorists are a bunch of scattered, ineffective groups with limited power to do anything. When they DO make big, nasty attacks it's only through sheer luck, and years of planning that it actually works. -The bombing of the USS Cole, the World Trade Centre attacks…

There's no “theocracy” here. You're roping in Iran which has nothing to do with anything and maybe the hopes of individual political activist groups for their OWN homelands. That's pretty stupid.

If you go into other people's countries, invade and slaughter, and you happen to get attacked by some organised terrorist groups as well as the native resistance forces, militias or whatever else, well that's just to be expected I'm afraid.

Sheesh… Democracy VS Theocracy? F**k. I can't wait for the Russians to get back to strength again so we have someone at least worthy of inventing as an evil boogeyman once more. These paper-tigers are getting dog eared lol!

There are places in the world it is a valid concern. Did I rope in Iran? Don't put words in my mouth. A few scattered BIG attacks… Soo the hundreds of bombings, kidnapings of US journalists, tourists, and businessmen as well as their subsequent beheadings don't count? The state department counted 665 incidents of terrorist activity against the USA not counting Iraq.

The point of the thread was to discuss motivations not effectiveness. Theocracy is a relevant term here because the Islamic groups that attack us want a strict Islamic theocratic state as opposed to one where people can choose to be infidels.
Don't be a stick in the mud traditionalist! Support global warming!

Tech Support: The Comic!! Updates Somedays!!
last edited on July 14, 2011 12:58PM
bobhhh at 8:11AM, Jan. 14, 2008
(offline)
posts: 893
joined: 5-12-2007
Typical spin? Sure. I just wish somebody, some modern day Edward R. Murrow would call the bluff.

It may be naive, but I think if all 3 networks began demanding that politicians began answering truthfully, actually enforcing that wonderful freedom of the press we always brag about, then heads would roll and we wouldn't get sold things like a “War on Terror”.

What is the WOT really? It's a janitorial job, cleaning up after decades of oppressive foreign policy. The Republicans all jumped on Ron Paul at one of the debates and tried to lynch him with the flag for saying as much, but he was right.

We were asking for 911, we bought their hatred with our meddling in their sovereign countries, supporting and installing oppresssive regimes for purposes of securing cheap oil. You could even invoke the maxim that says if you are not part of the solution, you are part of the problem and say all American are by default guilty because they are too lazy and gullible to keep our leaders from enacting destructive foreign policy on their behalf.

But instead we swallow convenient fantasies like the terrorists are inhuman monsters who hate freedom.

Until American realize that insisting on burning fossil fuels and keeping gas here at half the price everyone else in the world pays is responsible for for 90 percent of the worlds political conflict, we are doomed to be vilified and targeted by the extremeists who prey upon the disillusionment and hopelessness of poor and oppressed people in those countries.

…and by our complacency we will have in some ways deserved it.
My name is Bob and I approved this signature.
last edited on July 14, 2011 11:29AM
Pulse at 8:12AM, Jan. 14, 2008
(online)
posts: 92
joined: 10-22-2007
Before I begin my ranting I want to say this…I am tired of everyone hating on bush for going to war! when 9/11 started everyone wanted to go to war so dont act like he was the only idiot in the whole fucking favor of going to war. ok but NO I think he is dumb I know he is saying that terrorists hate freedom i like saying I dont know but still you are completelly right the only reason why no one asked bush about what he said is because he is president. and talking back to the president is like talking back to an angry father. No I am not a redneck who is a bush lover I think the undited states of america would do better off with him but still I am tired of all this “bush causes war!” shit.
last edited on July 14, 2011 2:56PM
bobhhh at 8:23AM, Jan. 14, 2008
(offline)
posts: 893
joined: 5-12-2007
Pulse
Before I begin my ranting I want to say this…I am tired of everyone hating on bush for going to war! when 9/11 started everyone wanted to go to war so dont act like he was the only idiot in the whole fucking favor of going to war. ok but NO I think he is dumb I know he is saying that terrorists hate freedom i like saying I dont know but still you are completelly right the only reason why no one asked bush about what he said is because he is president. and talking back to the president is like talking back to an angry father. No I am not a redneck who is a bush lover I think the undited states of america would do better off with him but still I am tired of all this “bush causes war!” shit.

Yes we all wanted to get Bin Laden. Just like we all would want to bust any mass murderer.

But many of us spoke out against Iraq, and were branded as traitors for disagreeing with Bush. Remember Freedom fries?

But even when 911 happened, and we all mourned, many of us still instinctively knew why the vengeance of these people eventually reached our shores. They don't hate freedom as much as they hate our military bases on their doorstep. After all, for a lot of these people, American freedom comes courtesy of the business end of a smart bomb.
My name is Bob and I approved this signature.
last edited on July 14, 2011 11:29AM
ozoneocean at 9:27AM, Jan. 14, 2008
(online)
posts: 24,946
joined: 1-2-2004
imshard
!!
Theocracy is totally irrelevant because you're talking about the aspirations of a few for their own individual, very different reasons, not some existing system of government anywhere and not something that is any way equal too, or naturally in opposition to the US, or to the concept of democracy. You're falling into the boring old trap of magnifying the latest biting ant and turning it into a threatening demon.

I mentioned Iran because it's pretty much the only existing Islamic Theocracy I can readily name. There may be others, but I can name them right now.

And yes, yes, oh yes indeed I say: “a few scattered attacks.” You see I've got an excellent sense of proportion and perspective, as well as fully intact capacities for logic and reason. ;)

Your smaller incidents are as nothing, I wouldn't even bother to count these if you're having a discussion about “war” here.
So what? You're trying to make some case by adding the cumulative weight of various criminal atrocities, most that happen in war zones anyway? Whaaa? And those are “against the US”? Huh? Are you trying to tell me those nut-cases wouldn't have been just as happy with Germans, brits, Israelis, Swiss, Japanese…?
Oh wait… They are. Ha!
Besides, if you're going to count that rubbish, then you have to count all the acts by the “Good Guys”, so it sort of cancels them all out… All the unlawful imprissonings, various kidnappings, torturings, atrocities in war, unprovoked invasions, sponsoring and encouraging attacks against Isamic groups anywhere the the world regarles of their motivations (tribal groups in Pakistan, the Islamic Council of Somalia, rebel groups in the Philippines) not to mention all the covert nastiness…

Typical nonsense.

Back to reality: The real “bad guys” are the ones killing civilians and oppressing people. At last count, that was everybody, with the “coalition of the willing” far outweighing anybody else on civilian casualties.

Perhaps we should change the slogan from “They hate our freedom”, to “We hate your Life”?
 
last edited on July 14, 2011 2:29PM
imshard at 10:36AM, Jan. 14, 2008
(online)
posts: 2,961
joined: 7-26-2007
ozoneocean
?!

I'm not sure how your points negate mine. You won't find any objection from me that the whole deal is a giant crapshoot. That and your news sources must put on a different spin than mine. No way we should have invaded countries when covert ops would have sufficed.

I have no problem with enemy leaders and combatants being quietly neutralized. Bush got in trouble because he made the leap to States who sponsor terrorists. It was the wrong thing to do when we have a growing debt and unstable economy. I take the view that the “detained” by the “good guys” should be actual terrorists. If so they have no rights under my constitution except those agreed to by international law. Little atrocities indeed. When I have have to chose between thier rights and my life I choose to live.

The Organization of the Islamic Conference (OIC) has 57 member states all of which are strict Islamic states. Most of those will execute you for not being muslim and many other countries are simply dangerous for non-muslims despite a lack of an official state religion.

The “bad guys” in this situation have a dream, however implausible and laughable it is, to make every country an Islamic country. That is their stated goal, as it has been repeatedly made and conveniently misinterpreted so many many times.
So in the end you have persuaded me: they don't hate freedom. They just love Islam. So much so, that they think EVERYBODY else should too.
Don't be a stick in the mud traditionalist! Support global warming!

Tech Support: The Comic!! Updates Somedays!!
last edited on July 14, 2011 12:58PM
bobhhh at 12:28PM, Jan. 14, 2008
(offline)
posts: 893
joined: 5-12-2007
imshard
So in the end you have persuaded me: they don't hate freedom. They just love Islam. So much so, that they think EVERYBODY else should too.

And we love multinational corporations so much, that we want to force EVERYBODY to join us in performing felatio on them.
My name is Bob and I approved this signature.
last edited on July 14, 2011 11:29AM
imshard at 12:59PM, Jan. 14, 2008
(online)
posts: 2,961
joined: 7-26-2007
bobhhh
imshard
So in the end you have persuaded me: they don't hate freedom. They just love Islam. So much so, that they think EVERYBODY else should too.

And we love multinational corporations so much, that we want to force EVERYBODY to join us in performing felatio on them.

That is both irrelevant to this discussion and inappropriate. In fact I find it offensive. We can't FORCE anybody to buy american products. I think its our culture and influence that is getting crammed down people's throats. Personally I'm an isolationist, so STFU.
Don't be a stick in the mud traditionalist! Support global warming!

Tech Support: The Comic!! Updates Somedays!!
last edited on July 14, 2011 12:58PM
bobhhh at 2:10PM, Jan. 14, 2008
(offline)
posts: 893
joined: 5-12-2007
imshard
bobhhh
imshard
So in the end you have persuaded me: they don't hate freedom. They just love Islam. So much so, that they think EVERYBODY else should too.

And we love multinational corporations so much, that we want to force EVERYBODY to join us in performing felatio on them.

That is both irrelevant to this discussion and inappropriate. In fact I find it offensive. We can't FORCE anybody to buy american products. I think its our culture and influence that is getting crammed down people's throats. Personally I'm an isolationist, so STFU.

My point is that they have an agenda and so do the neocons, they have an imperialist agenda that forces poor people around the world to put up with our multinational corporations, not to force them to buy our products, but to bully their governments and make back room deals, supported by our military might, to get their business done, no matter what the cost to the locals.

You find my language offensive? How about saving some of your outrage for the soulless oil companies and military industrial corporations that engender so much ill will towards the US across the world? They are the ones who should have been in the crosshairs on 911.
My name is Bob and I approved this signature.
last edited on July 14, 2011 11:29AM
CharleyHorse at 3:32PM, Jan. 14, 2008
(offline)
posts: 627
joined: 12-7-2006
“They Hate Freedom” pretty much has become a plank of the republican party platform, because at this point, to do otherwise would be to alienate vast numbers of non-thinking red neck gun lovers and alienate those people who - for whatever obscure reason voted for Bush in both 2000 and 2004 against all sane reason.

So the jingoistic- based war slogan “They Hate Freedom” is not only going to be around but is going to be flung around quite a bit once the republican presidential nominee finally squares off in one to one combat against Hillary Clinton - er - I mean the democrat candidate, whoever that might be; wink.

Witness the republican debate between candidates of a week or two ago, when Ron Paul dared to point out that 9-11-01 happened because the United States had been interfering in the internal affairs of various Islamic nation for many, many decades. "They Hate Freedom!“ was the rallying cry from every other republican candidate on the stage and then Ron Paul was very nearly accused of being insane or a traitor because he dared questioned the God given righteousness and utter innocence of the U.S. position, cause, and policies.

So ”They Hate Freedom" is now pretty much set in stone in the Republican Party and has at least a toe-hold in the Democrat Party simply because it is nearly political suicide for any democrat candidate to suggest that there are two sides to this issue.

last edited on July 14, 2011 11:40AM
TitanOne at 9:29PM, Jan. 14, 2008
(offline)
posts: 199
joined: 5-12-2007
lefarce
Sounds like your typical spin, nothing out of the ordinary. Our country has been enforcing beliefs on others and attempting to dehumanize large groups of people since conception. Nothing new.

That's true, but the War On Terror is worse because our constitutional rights are being eliminated on the fast track.

It is true that most US wars have been based on profiteering, lies, and hogwash. However, this is our first serious instance of imperial self-destruction.
last edited on July 14, 2011 4:30PM
RabbitMaster at 11:57AM, Jan. 15, 2008
(online)
posts: 129
joined: 5-26-2007
Charleyhorse
red neck gun lovers
Hey, I resemble that remark!

TitanOne
That's true, but the War On Terror is worse because our constitutional rights are being eliminated on the fast track.
That is my real concern. Like I said, I agree with the idea of the war and even the necessity of it, however the way it has been turned into an attack on individual liberty and limited government is unimaginable.

“Perhaps you would care to try your villany on a less defenseless opponent?”–Kung Fu Rabbit
last edited on July 14, 2011 2:57PM
bobhhh at 1:22PM, Jan. 16, 2008
(offline)
posts: 893
joined: 5-12-2007
RabbitMaster
Charleyhorse
red neck gun lovers
Hey, I resemble that remark!

TitanOne
That's true, but the War On Terror is worse because our constitutional rights are being eliminated on the fast track.
That is my real concern. Like I said, I agree with the idea of the war and even the necessity of it, however the way it has been turned into an attack on individual liberty and limited government is unimaginable.

not to mention fear mongerers are using this so called war on terror to subvert our morals, convincing us its ok to torture people if we call it enhanced interrogation, the spirit of the Geneva convention can be violated by lawerly double talk when it suits us and that the human rights being denied detainees are only for US citizens.

Thats the moral equivalent of, “She was asking for it, they're all just asking for it”.
My name is Bob and I approved this signature.
last edited on July 14, 2011 11:29AM
lefarce at 7:58PM, Jan. 16, 2008
(online)
posts: 5,454
joined: 2-9-2006
TitanOne
lefarce
Sounds like your typical spin, nothing out of the ordinary. Our country has been enforcing beliefs on others and attempting to dehumanize large groups of people since conception. Nothing new.

That's true, but the War On Terror is worse because our constitutional rights are being eliminated on the fast track.

It is true that most US wars have been based on profiteering, lies, and hogwash. However, this is our first serious instance of imperial self-destruction.

Pick up a history book and read about America's stance during the French Revolution. I would argue that the breaking apart of a nation was much much faster during that. We were much more divided during the entire course and for years to come. Now we're at a majority disapproval rating.

 
last edited on July 14, 2011 1:32PM
Calbeck at 12:21AM, Jan. 17, 2008
(offline)
posts: 63
joined: 11-30-2007
bobhhh
He then went on to repeat the big lie that terrorists hate freedom.

Name a terrorist who supports it.

We're talking about people who publically threatened to kill people for voting in an election in Iraq…regardless of WHO they voted for. Just because they voted at all, because it wasn't an election controlled by Hussein (99.WHAT percent voted for him again?).

This is meant to dehumanize them

How could one possibly dehumanize people who advocate strapping bombs to children expressly for the purpose of killing other children? *rolls eyes*

Have we become so callous that we just accept the fact that Bush lies between his teeth and never has to account for it?

Actually, I recall the hard-core right-wingers saying the same thing about Clinton. Now you sound just like 'em: your favorite target is just plain guilty and who needs to discuss anything like confirmable facts before getting a rope?

Really now Mr. President, isn't it possible they hate us because we keep fucking up their countries for the sake of cheap oil?

You mean the “cheap oil” we're paying more per barrel for than ever before? The oil we're getting less of from Iraq than we did during sanctions? That cheap oil, you say?

Would it be the oil that Bush went on record as saying years ago the US had no claim to? The oil that no US company is pulling out of the ground and selling elsewhere? Perhaps you're referring to the oil revenues going directly into the Iraqi treasury as opposed to a US corporate account?

You know, I know they say the truth hurts, but you should really avoid running into walls at full tilt.

Oh, wait, you must be referring to the nonexistent Afghan pipeline that doesn't access any of the nonexistent Afghan oil but merely transports it from the Caspian Sea ports to Pakistan, thereby making oil SOMEWHAT less expensive in terms of shipping expenses…assuming it's ever built to start with?

Or maybe not. Maybe it's that lunar green-cheese oil that we're going to invade the Moon to seize next year. I'd roll my eyes again, but they're starting to hurt from excessive rotation.

Isn't possible that people strap bombs to their chests because they feel they have no other way of driving us out of their countries?

Or getting revenge for being forced to accept “lowly” Kurds and Shias as social, economic and political equals, akin to forcing White Americans of 1920 to accept Blacks on the same terms?

Next up: we hear from the “patriots” who take potshots at abortion doctors who are only “trying to save the nation”. It's a point to note that the abortion-clinic snipers are at least MORE discriminating in their decision to murder civilians.

Isn't it possible that they love freedom, but it's freedom from our meddling that they truly are fighting for?

Six million women with purple thumbs apparently disagree with you.

Aren't the terrorists just doing what we would do if an occupying force of far greater military strength descended upon us?

Would I strap a bomb to my chest and kill my fellow American civilians in an attempt to make the occupying force feel guilty about it and go home? Um, no. I can't think of anyone else who would, either. Maybe the abortion-clinic nuts would, assuming the occupiers didn't outlaw abortion.

When is somebody going to call Bush on his bullshit and force him to answer a straight question honestly?

You could start by showing me that he's bullshitting in the first place. Usually I just get a fusillade of bullshit accusations when I ask people to back it up.
last edited on July 14, 2011 11:35AM
bobhhh at 5:10AM, Jan. 17, 2008
(offline)
posts: 893
joined: 5-12-2007
Calbeck
bobhhh
He then went on to repeat the big lie that terrorists hate freedom.

Name a terrorist who supports it.

We're talking about people who publically threatened to kill people for voting in an election in Iraq…regardless of WHO they voted for. Just because they voted at all, because it wasn't an election controlled by Hussein (99.WHAT percent voted for him again?).

I'm sure the terrorists want to enjoy their version of freedom. You apparently suffer from the ethnocenturic fallacy that our definition of freedom is the only one that counts. Isn't it possible that they consider ridding their region of the world of the foreign influence of mega oil corporations and captialist foreign policy a sort of freedom?

This is meant to dehumanize them

How could one possibly dehumanize people who advocate strapping bombs to children expressly for the purpose of killing other children? *rolls eyes*

Desperate people take drastic measures. I don't condone their actions, but you might place yourself in their shoes and try to understand why a sane person could lose all hope and take one last desperate act that he feels will bring his family and country that much closer to freedom from foreign devils that rape and plunder it.

Have we become so callous that we just accept the fact that Bush lies between his teeth and never has to account for it?

Actually, I recall the hard-core right-wingers saying the same thing about Clinton. Now you sound just like 'em: your favorite target is just plain guilty and who needs to discuss anything like confirmable facts before getting a rope?

Actually Clinton was dogged about everything he did and said all the way up to impeachment for every day of his presidency by the oppostion. Bush hasn't come under a scintilla of the scrutiny that Bubba did.

Really now Mr. President, isn't it possible they hate us because we keep fucking up their countries for the sake of cheap oil?

You mean the “cheap oil” we're paying more per barrel for than ever before? The oil we're getting less of from Iraq than we did during sanctions? That cheap oil, you say?

Pay attention dude, every other country in the world pays twice what we do for a gallon of gas. That doesn't happen because they like us.

Would it be the oil that Bush went on record as saying years ago the US had no claim to? The oil that no US company is pulling out of the ground and selling elsewhere? Perhaps you're referring to the oil revenues going directly into the Iraqi treasury as opposed to a US corporate account?

You know, I know they say the truth hurts, but you should really avoid running into walls at full tilt.

If you think US corporations are not profiting in Iraq, then you are not paying attention again.

Oh, wait, you must be referring to the nonexistent Afghan pipeline that doesn't access any of the nonexistent Afghan oil but merely transports it from the Caspian Sea ports to Pakistan, thereby making oil SOMEWHAT less expensive in terms of shipping expenses…assuming it's ever built to start with?

Or maybe not. Maybe it's that lunar green-cheese oil that we're going to invade the Moon to seize next year. I'd roll my eyes again, but they're starting to hurt from excessive rotation.

Isn't possible that people strap bombs to their chests because they feel they have no other way of driving us out of their countries?

Or getting revenge for being forced to accept “lowly” Kurds and Shias as social, economic and political equals, akin to forcing White Americans of 1920 to accept Blacks on the same terms?

Next up: we hear from the “patriots” who take potshots at abortion doctors who are only “trying to save the nation”. It's a point to note that the abortion-clinic snipers are at least MORE discriminating in their decision to murder civilians.

Don't put words in my mouth. I am not condoning their actions or their prejudice. But you might remeber that we have prejudices in this country too. Who knows how we would act if our country was constantly under seige by foreign goverments, our land and resources were continually plundered by repressive regimes propped up by foreign money and weapons and we had to endure crushing poverty for decades. Let's not forget that People rioted over Rodney king and engaged in fisticuff during the oil shortages of the mid seventies. It doesn't take much to see civility tossed out the window in favor of fear and survival. Given the right circumstances I could envision Americans seeing themselves as heroic by strapping bombs to their chests to blow up foreign invaders and their local collaborators.

Isn't it possible that they love freedom, but it's freedom from our meddling that they truly are fighting for?

Six million women with purple thumbs apparently disagree with you.

If you blow up a supermarket and everybody comes to gather up the food, does that meab they are glad you did it, or are they just hungry and will take what they can get in a bad situation.

Aren't the terrorists just doing what we would do if an occupying force of far greater military strength descended upon us?

Would I strap a bomb to my chest and kill my fellow American civilians in an attempt to make the occupying force feel guilty about it and go home? Um, no. I can't think of anyone else who would, either. Maybe the abortion-clinic nuts would, assuming the occupiers didn't outlaw abortion.

Yes but if a local american milita, traitors to our country, that supported a foreign occupying power were killing your relatives, raping your daughters, throwing your sons in jail without due process, wouldn't it be possible that someone might make a desperate act to show these charlatans that there complicity with the foreig invaders carries consequences?

You have to stop judging these people by our standards because they don't live in America , with freedom and individual rights, they live in hell.


When is somebody going to call Bush on his bullshit and force him to answer a straight question honestly?

You could start by showing me that he's bullshitting in the first place. Usually I just get a fusillade of bullshit accusations when I ask people to back it up.
Really now, is it that hard to find Bush lying? Just take the build up to the Iraq war and you will find the most colorful string of flip flopping justification for entering that country, a country which was no danger to us, but now is a hot bed of sectarian strife and terrorist havens.
My name is Bob and I approved this signature.
last edited on July 14, 2011 11:29AM

Forgot Password
©2011 WOWIO, Inc. All Rights Reserved