Log in  
Sign up

Play online chess!

Pages:  1 2 3 Next »
From	Message
obviously 14-Sep-06, 17:25	Time to demand the truth Complete article at www.tompaine.com" target="_blank">-> www.tompaine.com : George Bush’s new argument that Iran and Hezbollah are part of the same terrorist network as al-Qaida turns the recent history of international politics on its head to cover up a truth that makes the Bush administration extremely uncomfortable....No wonder Bush feels compelled to tell a big lie about Iran and al-Qaida. The real history of the international politics of al-Qaida shows that the Bush administration is being compromised by its ties with countries aligned with the terrorists against Iran. This fifth anniversary of 9/11 is a time to demand the truth and call the administration to account. I wonder why he still manages to get away with it ...
zorroloco 14-Sep-06, 17:42	the truth sadly the truth is that most people seem to not care to know the depth of the dishonesty. it is so clear, in so many ways, that this administration is rotton to the core. from incompetents (dumsfeld, brownie, gonzales, bolton) to the devil (cheny). this is just one more instance of their total disregard of anything that does not further they aims. they remind me of young boys who will look you in the eye and say 'i didn't eat it' while the crumbs are on their faces. and we, the mainstream, tv watching, 2.3 kids middle americans lap it up....
flcrackers 14-Sep-06, 18:31	kop states... "George Bush’s new argument that Iran and Hezbollah are part of the same terrorist network as al-Qaida". ++++++++++++++++++++ Quite frankly, I don't see where Bush said that exactly. If you are refering to the following, he was giving a breakdown of who joins what. Sunni joins organizations like al Qaeda, Shia joins groups like Hezballah (they follow different teachings) who take money and stuff from Syria and Iran. Maybe its the part where he says that they from the outline of a "single movement". Is that it? They do have they're own ideology but both have a single goal of a total Muslim world. Maybe you can explain it to me. ++++++++++++++++++++ from www.tompaine.com "The enemies of liberty come from different parts of the world, and they take inspiration from different sources. Some are radicalized followers of the Sunni tradition, who swear allegiance to terrorist organizations like al Qaeda. Others are radicalized followers of the Shia tradition, who join groups like Hezbollah and take guidance from state sponsors like Syria and Iran. Still others are "homegrown" terrorists -- fanatics who live quietly in free societies they dream to destroy. Despite their differences, these groups from -- form the outlines of a single movement, a worldwide network of radicals that use terror to kill those who stand in the way of their totalitarian ideology. And the unifying feature of this movement, the link that spans sectarian divisions and local grievances, is the rigid conviction that free societies are a threat to their twisted view of Islam."
zorroloco 14-Sep-06, 18:38	crackers perhaps it is where he says "a worldwide network of radicals that use terror to kill those who stand in the way of their totalitarian ideology." jeez...can't see where anyone might get the idea that they form 'a worldwide network?' can you?
codyj 14-Sep-06, 18:56	It happens all the time. When somebody starts talking about something that makes perfect sense, some one will come up behind them and support Bush saying, "That's not true," even though what they say doesn't even make sense to me. Has anybody ever heard of what happened to WTC#7 on September 11, 2001? And even though planes were flone into the buildings doesn't mean that they should have collapsed.
zorroloco 14-Sep-06, 20:27	crackers seriously. do you even read what you write? gimme a break. that last post was ludicrous!
codyj 14-Sep-06, 20:43	I don't read what I write, most of the time I do sound a little funny.
flcrackers 15-Sep-06, 09:41	oops...some mispelled words... There I did it again, I thought that kop posted that article. All the time it was "obviously". Sorry 'bout that. Well it sure sounded like something kop would post, but I forgot what the majority of posters are here. Sorry jeff that you feel that way. 'Ludicrous', mighty strong adjective. I believe that article took those comments out of context. The part that they left out was..."the unifying feature of this movement, the link that spans sectarian divisions and local grievances, is the rigid conviction that free societies are a threat to their twisted view of Islam." This comes from OBL himself when he said Islam and the ideology of the West are not compatible. They (terroists) also believe the West to be a single movement and we're not. Our goals and objectives are different from the French or Germans. And theirs are different than Italy and the Netherlands. But they all form a basic "outline" of individual freedoms. Iran and Hezbollah are not part of al-Qaida or a subsidary of the same. Think what you must, just continue to pay your taxes to keep the war effort moving forward.
zorroloco 15-Sep-06, 09:51	crackers did not mean to offend....just seemed like you had not actually read what you posted. but, i certainly understand that things are taken out of context often! still, you questioned where people got the idea that al-queda and hezballah were part of an international network, and then posted part of a bush speech that stated it! you can see why i thought that a bit odd, i am sure. : )
leo_london 15-Sep-06, 11:25	The quote from Bush.. " Despite their differences, these groups from -- form the outlines of a single movement, a worldwide network of radicals that use terror to kill those who stand in the way of their totalitarian ideology. And the unifying feature of this movement, the link that spans sectarian divisions and local grievances, is the rigid conviction that free societies are a threat to their twisted view of Islam." Apart from his reference to a " worldwide network " it appears a fairly accurate description of the threat we face. The one thing that makes the threat from these Islamic extremists different to any other is their apparent lack of " demands ". There may be what Bush calls " local grievences " but they are united in one single cause..the destruction of of what we loosely call " western democracy ". From the rhetoric I have read/heard, we have to change or they will destoy us, and be glorifying their God in the process. Its frightening, and leaves no room for negotiation...they hate us for " being us ".
bobbynox 15-Sep-06, 11:52	In WWII Japan and Germany were allies. Today, Syria and Iran are allies. The axis is an allusion to the 'revolving' element of actions which come from those powers who are grouped together. N. Korea, Iran are not related, except that they are on the same 'axis'. Iran and Syria, (and the terrorists that they support) are intertwined, and should be dealt a heavy blow.
markallen 15-Sep-06, 14:30	leo said <<Its frightening, and leaves no room for negotiation...they hate us for " being us ".>> I'm happy to be corrected/enlightened but do they really? OBL (as i understand it) wants US Military out of the Muslim heartlands of the persian gulf and has voiced that he wants the west to stop "plundering arab oil". palestinians want autonomy and revision of land bounderies. Iran (the pressident anyways) has said unfortunate things about Israel but in the context of being demonised by Bush. I wonder if a good part of the solutions are in reframing and containing some of the crazy rhetoric. We aren't in a "clash of civilizations" just coz Bush paints it that way.
leo_london 15-Sep-06, 16:17	Mark..I think you have to ask yourself if meeting those various demands ( if we were in a position do do so ) around the world would actually end the terrorist activities. Obviously some actions perpetrated by the west have acted as a useful recruiting mechanism for the extremists, but I believe the festering hatred was always there among a small number of fanatics. You have quoted certain specific grievences but I would say that usually the rhetoric is more in the form of anti-western ranting. Here in Britain, I have read literature published by some of these madmen, they despise the books we read, the clothes we wear, the films we watch, the food we eat. It doesnt take an enormous leap for that kind of brainwashing to turn to hatred, for their followers to look on us as " sub-human "...remember the last time that phrase was used ? There may be only a very small percentage of Muslims prepared to use violence, to sacrifice their lives, to kill the infidel, in the name of their God..but it only takes a small percentage, especially when there are an estimated 1.5 billion muslims worldwide.
markallen 15-Sep-06, 16:42	Leo ,, Thanks for the response. Perhaps your'e right, but i wonder about the "polarisation". I do believe that there are themes in "radical islam" that are a concern but hey, there have always been whackos thinking unhelpful thoughts around the margins. The KKK and national front being two (one US, one british) that come to mind. BUT the majority of folks never subscribed to their views, or if they did, only a tiny bit in their darkest moments. My concern is that Bushes actions act to polarise the debate/conflict and minimise room for dialogue. Iran is a nation of individuals albeit with a theocratic leadership, Hezbollah is an organisation percieved in nations where it is present as a social services system as much as a military organisation. Bush's rhetoric seems to seek to demonise and corral these bodies/states so their is no longer ROOM for constructive conflict resolution. Humans are hard wired to think tribally (of us versus other) but good leadership requires framing things in such ways to enable solutions to emerge that are palletable to all.
markallen 15-Sep-06, 16:52	there's a quote that.. sums up what i'm trying to arrive at with my emphasis on the "frame". "To the man with a hammer, everything looks like a nail" 'scuse my lack of eloquence....it's early here
codyj 15-Sep-06, 17:48	Deleted by codyj on 16-Sep-06, 19:42.
qiwi 15-Sep-06, 20:44	Leo... I can understand your position.... but in my experience you cannot generalise about an entire nation of people.... In my travels, which incidentally took in Iran and Afghanistan, I found people pretty much the same the world over... most people just want to get on with their lives. Surprisingly almost everywhere the young people embrace the same things...western music & western fashion...I remember getting bombarded with the soundtrack from 'Saturday Night Fever' on my South american sojourn.... No, I dont think they hate our way life of mate, but I do think the people in the middle east are pretty pissed off at the moment about the ongoing violence precipitated by the poorly thought out and poorly executed "War on Terror"... which Bush and the Pope seem intent on turning into a Religious War...
markallen 15-Sep-06, 20:48	what he says.....
bobbynox 15-Sep-06, 21:22	No, Qiwi. Respectfully, they are extremely happy to have Saddam out of power. They are extremely happy to imagine the freedoms their kids will experience as the generations grow. They are extremely happy that the neighborhoods are 'slowly' coming back, but coming back, they are. The people who report anger of the war are short-sighted. They are not taking the long-view. They are unwilling to see the forest-for-the-trees. And the media loves them, the media tells their story; the media is mistaken.
kementari 15-Sep-06, 21:42	<<The people who report anger of the war are short-sighted. They are not taking the long-view. They are unwilling to see the forest-for-the-trees. And the media loves them, the media tells their story; the media is mistaken.>> Not really, bobby. The optimists are happy that Saddam is gone, and look forward to a democratic country on the verge of rebuilding itself. The pessimists.. they tend to be a little quieter. They fear that their country will go the way of Iran, and don't want to speak up too loudly because they want to be there to see those future generations grow up. There is a great deal of fear in that country today. If I were living there, I would be quietly finding a way to Europe as so many of the people who started to read the writing on the wall in early 2002 did, and indeed, are still doing today.
markallen 15-Sep-06, 21:45	bobbynox... with respect i don't think we were talking about that. It's a seperate issue isn't it?
zorroloco 15-Sep-06, 22:46	clarification in a previous post, i wrote: <sadly the truth is that most people seem to not care to know the depth of the dishonesty. it is so clear, in so many ways, that this administration is rotton to the core. from incompetents (dumsfeld, brownie, gonzales, bolton) to the devil (cheny). this is just one more instance of their total disregard of anything that does not further they aims. they remind me of young boys who will look you in the eye and say 'i didn't eat it' while the crumbs are on their faces. and we, the mainstream, tv watching, 2.3 kids middle americans lap it up....> it was pointed out to me that one might construe my reference to brownie as a racist referral to dr. rice. nothing could have been further from my mind. the reference was to michael 'heck of a job brownie' brown, of course. for the record, i do not think condi is incompetent. i think she is evil, and that has nothing to do with the color of her skin.
kementari 15-Sep-06, 23:28	lol Thanks for the clarification, Jeff. Very entertaining.
zorroloco 16-Sep-06, 09:21	condi is she incompetent? or merely good at being bad?
soulcrates 16-Sep-06, 16:34	Condi has a grudge against God, and men. Perhaps she was ridiculed for her odd look, and gapped front teeth. She learned to hate men early in life, unless they could further her career. She is only worried about old number one, and could care less about Americans or even humanity as a whole. That must be a pre-requisite for working in this Administration, since all of them stand together.
leo_london 16-Sep-06, 17:20	soul..I take it you wouldn't then... with Condi...even after a few drinks ?
markallen 16-Sep-06, 17:30	even if thigh boots, hand cuffs and a whip were involved?
soulcrates 16-Sep-06, 17:49	When she smiles, I don't know whether to smile back, or kick a field goal. Just kidding, but seriously don't you think she could afford dental insurance coverage? Perhaps she just enjoys hating people, so this gives them a reason to make fun of her, and her a reason to hate them, and makes it easier to lie to them.
deadofknight 16-Sep-06, 18:23	You know its pretty base too make fun of her appearance as a method of attacking her. I mean...gap toothed, enjoys hating people... You don't even know her. I've always found it odd that when people of color succeed as republicans or conservatives, the most base and vicious criticisms are used to attack them...ie Justice Clarance Thomas. What exactly has she done that would lead you to believe she hates people? I find her very astute, bright, well thought out and exceptionally intelligent.
bobbynox 16-Sep-06, 18:44	She was President of Stanford University in Palo Alto, CA. The regents of that University don't take fools to lead their school. She is one of the brightest people in Govt.
Pages:  1 2 3 Next »

GameKnot: play chess online, chess clubs, monthly chess tournaments, Internet chess league, chess teams, online chess puzzles, free online chess games database and more.