So Ahmed Hikmat Shakir (if it's the same guy, all that's on the roster is a name) is the guy they've been trying to pin something on for months. Funny thing is, there was supposedly all this information on him and reported involvement in 9/11, but was arrested and released twice, once after an arrest in Qatar and once after being interrogated by the CIA in Jordan.
It makes you wonder why he doesn't have a personalized cell at guantanamo
I never said "satisfy." I said "offer an alternative." Imagine if, for instance, instead of dumping $1 billion a week into supplying our troops, we'd dumped $1 billion a week into countering the madrassas in Afghanistan by setting up economic incentives for children to go to real schools? Imagine if, instead of moving our soldiers to Iraq, we're used them to build libraries and filled them with all the literature of Western culture? What if we'd paid people to come in from the sticks to get an education?
Obviously this doesn't even work in inner-cities in the United States, why would it work abroad?
I suppose since you can "imagine" it, it must be right.
Imagine that we built these schools and the tribes only sent the boys by using fear tactics at night to provoke families into keeping their girls at home.
Imagine the girls did go and the western literature told them the actually have rights. When confronting others about their lack of rights they are stoned to death.
Imagine that local tribesman declare that just like western troops, western schools, western thought and western literature is just another form of imperialism and blow the school up.
And yet you seem to condone such thinking. That's my point.
The thing I think is important, is that a line must be drawn in the sand somewhere. If you are looking for gray you will find it. If I were a guy that was on a remote island and read the stuff here, it would be hard to tell who is the bad guys. The lines have been blurred so badly by infinite reasoning and excuse making that it is ridiculous.
Quote:
Originally posted by midwinter
I never said "satisfy." I said "offer an alternative." Imagine if, for instance, instead of dumping $1 billion a week into supplying our troops, we'd dumped $1 billion a week into countering the madrassas in Afghanistan by setting up economic incentives for children to go to real schools? Imagine if, instead of moving our soldiers to Iraq, we're used them to build libraries and filled them with all the literature of Western culture? What if we'd paid people to come in from the sticks to get an education?
Using soldiers solely to build libraries would be wasteful to the extreme. Besides that they are doing that in Iraq as we speak. I don't think SH would let soldiers in to build libraries. Do you think that the leaders of SA, Iran, Pakastan would be more willing? How many libraries do we have here in the united states? How many schools do we have here? What is the total bill for education and related programs here? I will suggest that we already do what you are suggesting.
Besides, this terrorism thing is religious based. Can you see a bill being passed that promotes religion in this country?! It will never happen. believing that 40 virgins await you in heaven as a reward for killing the infidel (you and me) is a faith based teaching to these terrorists. In turn they are being taught that killing (you and I) is a requirement for divine blessings.
Quote:
Originally posted by midwinter
To fight what? A tactic? An idea? That is attacking the symptoms but not the disease. And this, I'm afraid, is a tactic that others have tried to fight and failed. Miserably.
I'll put this really simply: You cannot destroy ideas with force. All you can do is offer more appealing alternatives.
Sell that to Tojo. Tell that to Hitler. Ask Stalin if his ideas were crushed with force. The communist ideas of the soviet union were crushed by the mere threat of force, I would beg to differ on this one.
You've already demonstrated why that's a bad idea.
giant's idea of debate is to declare everyone, all their sources and ideas that disagree with his to be ignorant.
There is already plenty of proof if this. Don't argue with him. giant has his blinders on and everything you post is just ignorant nonsense to him. He will you tell you so repeatedly. He will also insult your intelligence, question everything about your background, make repeated claims about you with regard to ignorance, racism, hatefulness, etc.
Just take this post and make it a sticky. Whenever you see giant demonstrating one or all of these above, just ignore him. You can't discuss with someone who is wearing blinders. It isn't debate, it is attempting to argue someone through their own ignorance.
No, WSJ is dishonest and biased, as demonstrated in the flat-out deceit used to attack Clarke, among hundreds of other incidents.
giant's idea of debate is to declare everyone, all their sources and ideas that disagree with his to be ignorant.
There is already plenty of proof if this. Don't argue with him. giant has his blinders on and everything you post is just ignorant nonsense to him. He will you tell you so repeatedly. He will also insult your intelligence, question everything about your background, make repeated claims about you with regard to ignorance, racism, hatefulness, etc.
Just take this post and make it a sticky. Whenever you see giant demonstrating one or all of these above, just ignore him. You can't discuss with someone who is wearing blinders. It isn't debate, it is attempting to argue someone through their own ignorance.
This whole thread is yet more saddening (and unnecessary) evidence of the dumbed-down, reactionary, reductionist ([i]reductio ad absurdum ?[i/]) and essentially fundamentalist mindset at work.
Saddam was bad.
911 perps were bad.
Therefore Saddam = 911 perps.
We'll supply the evidence later. Waydown the list after WMD.
As someone said earlier: thugs always tend to end up together. And they don't ever oppose each other, no thug anywhere is ever a thug to another thug....no sir....
Actually I think you're a perfect example of the converse of that. In the face of some interesting information you dumb down the discussion with your bogus analysis of people you don't agree with.
People like you think you have all the answers so when something new pops up you dismiss it out of hand. You're incapable of dealing with new information because group think has locked you in.
Do any of you have anything of substance to add to the discussion? You know, something actually related to the thread topic and not your feelings of inadequacy?
Didn't think so.
Don't worry. I'm sure Limbaugh or Coulter will give you something to regurgitate soon enough.
Do any of you have anything of substance to add to the discussion? You know, something actually related to the thread topic and not your feelings of inadequacy?
Didn't think so.
Don't worry. I'm sure Limbaugh or Coulter will give you something to regurgitate soon enough.
giant's idea of debate is to declare everyone, all their sources and ideas that disagree with his to be ignorant.
There is already plenty of proof if this. Don't argue with him. giant has his blinders on and everything you post is just ignorant nonsense to him. He will you tell you so repeatedly. He will also insult your intelligence, question everything about your background, make repeated claims about you with regard to ignorance, racism, hatefulness, etc.
Just take this post and make it a sticky. Whenever you see giant demonstrating one or all of these above, just ignore him. You can't discuss with someone who is wearing blinders. It isn't debate, it is attempting to argue someone through their own ignorance.
OMG newsmax... Too funny. Good source, it ranks up there with the WatchTower. Read the article again. It's nothing but conjecture and "Saddam knew a guy who was in a city where other guys were..." No, the WSJ actually has an almost NY post, or Wash Times record when reporting the facts. These three have been know to put Fox News to shame in the realm of creative misleading sentences go. This newsmax (incredible source) is a secondhand rehash of a WSJ editorial?, article? Who knows because Newsmax didn't source it.
i still say we need to attack and make regime change in florida...
florida had AQ operatives living there, florida allowed those operatives to be trained to fly planes, most likely at a school certified by the state of florida...heck, florida even rigged the 2000 elections
why haven't we yet, as a country, dealt with the evil empire that is florida??
i mean, if an AQ bad man being in baghdad is reason to link AQ to sadam, then many AQ bad men living and training in florida should also link AQ to jeb bush
Gosh, WSJ makes it so easy to find them getting creative with information:
Quote:
As others have reported, at the time of the summit Shakir was working at the Kuala Lumpur airport, having obtained the job through an Iraqi intelligence agent at the Iraqi embassy.
But what is really known about the embassy employee?
Quote:
...a job he claimed to have obtained through an Iraqi embassy employee.
From the Feith memo.
Of course, without the embellishment (in this case, stating as fact something that is not fact) it just doesn't look as sinister as the WSJ would like.
i still say we need to attack and make regime change in florida...
florida had AQ operatives living there, florida allowed those operatives to be trained to fly planes, most likely at a school certified by the state of florida...heck, florida even rigged the 2000 elections
why haven't we yet, as a country, dealt with the evil empire that is florida??
i mean, if an AQ bad man being in baghdad is reason to link AQ to sadam, then many AQ bad men living and training in florida should also link AQ to jeb bush
g
And Germany too . . .and Saudi Arabia too, and Indonesia, and Morrocco, and, of course, it hardly needs to be said, Franace too!!
The LINKS are so obviouse!!!!!
They are so obviouse, scraps of paper with 'phone numbers' supposedly written on them . . . proof of Governmental malfeasance on all their parts . . . especially those Floridians!!
Geb Bush is obviously part of AQ, and trying to take his brother down!!
Comments
Originally posted by Scott
Maybe we should just toss them all in the trash and allow our dogma to rule the day.
You've already demonstrated why that's a bad idea.
It makes you wonder why he doesn't have a personalized cell at guantanamo
Originally posted by midwinter
I never said "satisfy." I said "offer an alternative." Imagine if, for instance, instead of dumping $1 billion a week into supplying our troops, we'd dumped $1 billion a week into countering the madrassas in Afghanistan by setting up economic incentives for children to go to real schools? Imagine if, instead of moving our soldiers to Iraq, we're used them to build libraries and filled them with all the literature of Western culture? What if we'd paid people to come in from the sticks to get an education?
Obviously this doesn't even work in inner-cities in the United States, why would it work abroad?
I suppose since you can "imagine" it, it must be right.
Imagine that we built these schools and the tribes only sent the boys by using fear tactics at night to provoke families into keeping their girls at home.
Imagine the girls did go and the western literature told them the actually have rights. When confronting others about their lack of rights they are stoned to death.
Imagine that local tribesman declare that just like western troops, western schools, western thought and western literature is just another form of imperialism and blow the school up.
I can imagine lots of things as well.
Nick
Originally posted by midwinter
And yet you seem to condone such thinking. That's my point.
The thing I think is important, is that a line must be drawn in the sand somewhere. If you are looking for gray you will find it. If I were a guy that was on a remote island and read the stuff here, it would be hard to tell who is the bad guys. The lines have been blurred so badly by infinite reasoning and excuse making that it is ridiculous.
Originally posted by midwinter
I never said "satisfy." I said "offer an alternative." Imagine if, for instance, instead of dumping $1 billion a week into supplying our troops, we'd dumped $1 billion a week into countering the madrassas in Afghanistan by setting up economic incentives for children to go to real schools? Imagine if, instead of moving our soldiers to Iraq, we're used them to build libraries and filled them with all the literature of Western culture? What if we'd paid people to come in from the sticks to get an education?
Using soldiers solely to build libraries would be wasteful to the extreme. Besides that they are doing that in Iraq as we speak. I don't think SH would let soldiers in to build libraries. Do you think that the leaders of SA, Iran, Pakastan would be more willing? How many libraries do we have here in the united states? How many schools do we have here? What is the total bill for education and related programs here? I will suggest that we already do what you are suggesting.
Besides, this terrorism thing is religious based. Can you see a bill being passed that promotes religion in this country?! It will never happen. believing that 40 virgins await you in heaven as a reward for killing the infidel (you and me) is a faith based teaching to these terrorists. In turn they are being taught that killing (you and I) is a requirement for divine blessings.
Originally posted by midwinter
To fight what? A tactic? An idea? That is attacking the symptoms but not the disease. And this, I'm afraid, is a tactic that others have tried to fight and failed. Miserably.
I'll put this really simply: You cannot destroy ideas with force. All you can do is offer more appealing alternatives.
Sell that to Tojo. Tell that to Hitler. Ask Stalin if his ideas were crushed with force. The communist ideas of the soviet union were crushed by the mere threat of force, I would beg to differ on this one.
Originally posted by giant
You've already demonstrated why that's a bad idea.
giant's idea of debate is to declare everyone, all their sources and ideas that disagree with his to be ignorant.
There is already plenty of proof if this. Don't argue with him. giant has his blinders on and everything you post is just ignorant nonsense to him. He will you tell you so repeatedly. He will also insult your intelligence, question everything about your background, make repeated claims about you with regard to ignorance, racism, hatefulness, etc.
Just take this post and make it a sticky. Whenever you see giant demonstrating one or all of these above, just ignore him. You can't discuss with someone who is wearing blinders. It isn't debate, it is attempting to argue someone through their own ignorance.
Nick
Originally posted by giant
You still think the problem is your "politics?"
Originally posted by giant
No, WSJ is dishonest and biased, as demonstrated in the flat-out deceit used to attack Clarke, among hundreds of other incidents.
giant's idea of debate is to declare everyone, all their sources and ideas that disagree with his to be ignorant.
There is already plenty of proof if this. Don't argue with him. giant has his blinders on and everything you post is just ignorant nonsense to him. He will you tell you so repeatedly. He will also insult your intelligence, question everything about your background, make repeated claims about you with regard to ignorance, racism, hatefulness, etc.
Just take this post and make it a sticky. Whenever you see giant demonstrating one or all of these above, just ignore him. You can't discuss with someone who is wearing blinders. It isn't debate, it is attempting to argue someone through their own ignorance.
Nick
Originally posted by giant
You've already demonstrated why that's a bad idea.
Always remember. When you point the finger as someone else you have three fingers pointed back at yourself.
Originally posted by giant
You still think the problem is your "politics?"
What is it Mister Vagueman?
Come out and say what's on your mind. What exactly is YOUR problem with me?
Do you care to expand?
Originally posted by segovius
This whole thread is yet more saddening (and unnecessary) evidence of the dumbed-down, reactionary, reductionist ([i]reductio ad absurdum ?[i/]) and essentially fundamentalist mindset at work.
Saddam was bad.
911 perps were bad.
Therefore Saddam = 911 perps.
We'll supply the evidence later. Waydown the list after WMD.
As someone said earlier: thugs always tend to end up together. And they don't ever oppose each other, no thug anywhere is ever a thug to another thug....no sir....
Actually I think you're a perfect example of the converse of that. In the face of some interesting information you dumb down the discussion with your bogus analysis of people you don't agree with.
People like you think you have all the answers so when something new pops up you dismiss it out of hand. You're incapable of dealing with new information because group think has locked you in.
Originally posted by NaplesX
What is it Mister Vagueman?
Come out and say what's on your mind. What exactly is YOUR problem with me?
Do you care to expand?
Let me guess;
"If you don't know than I'm not going to tell you. You need to educate yourself. You're a mental midget."
Am I close?
Do any of you have anything of substance to add to the discussion? You know, something actually related to the thread topic and not your feelings of inadequacy?
Didn't think so.
Don't worry. I'm sure Limbaugh or Coulter will give you something to regurgitate soon enough.
Originally posted by giant
Gotta love those fake conservatives.
Do any of you have anything of substance to add to the discussion? You know, something actually related to the thread topic and not your feelings of inadequacy?
Didn't think so.
Don't worry. I'm sure Limbaugh or Coulter will give you something to regurgitate soon enough.
giant's idea of debate is to declare everyone, all their sources and ideas that disagree with his to be ignorant.
There is already plenty of proof if this. Don't argue with him. giant has his blinders on and everything you post is just ignorant nonsense to him. He will you tell you so repeatedly. He will also insult your intelligence, question everything about your background, make repeated claims about you with regard to ignorance, racism, hatefulness, etc.
Just take this post and make it a sticky. Whenever you see giant demonstrating one or all of these above, just ignore him. You can't discuss with someone who is wearing blinders. It isn't debate, it is attempting to argue someone through their own ignorance.
Nick
Originally posted by faust9
OMG newsmax... Too funny. Good source, it ranks up there with the WatchTower. Read the article again. It's nothing but conjecture and "Saddam knew a guy who was in a city where other guys were..." No, the WSJ actually has an almost NY post, or Wash Times record when reporting the facts. These three have been know to put Fox News to shame in the realm of creative misleading sentences go. This newsmax (incredible source) is a secondhand rehash of a WSJ editorial?, article? Who knows because Newsmax didn't source it.
Thanks I needed a
NewsMax is no worse than the NYT.
Another feeble attempt to justify the unjustifiable. Bush's stupid war in Iraq.
Besides if this was true it would be big news and everywhere.
Originally posted by segovius
No, people like me (God, I thought I was unique - sob) are incapable of dealing with new information because:
you never ***ing provide us with any.....
(Note: there's no smiley for the emotions I would wish to convey here if I was experiencing any so you have to imagine instead)
Just Read!
Is this going to be one of those threads where I have to run down the information to you because you're not able to do it yourself?
florida had AQ operatives living there, florida allowed those operatives to be trained to fly planes, most likely at a school certified by the state of florida...heck, florida even rigged the 2000 elections
why haven't we yet, as a country, dealt with the evil empire that is florida??
i mean, if an AQ bad man being in baghdad is reason to link AQ to sadam, then many AQ bad men living and training in florida should also link AQ to jeb bush
g
Originally posted by Scott
Always remember. When you point the finger as someone else you have three fingers pointed back at yourself.
Let's translate this:
"I am rubber, you are glue, what bounces off me sticks to you"
--very clever Scott . . . and worthy of your phd!
Originally posted by Scott
Just Read!
Gosh, WSJ makes it so easy to find them getting creative with information:
As others have reported, at the time of the summit Shakir was working at the Kuala Lumpur airport, having obtained the job through an Iraqi intelligence agent at the Iraqi embassy.
But what is really known about the embassy employee?
...a job he claimed to have obtained through an Iraqi embassy employee.
From the Feith memo.
Of course, without the embellishment (in this case, stating as fact something that is not fact) it just doesn't look as sinister as the WSJ would like.
Originally posted by thegelding
i still say we need to attack and make regime change in florida...
florida had AQ operatives living there, florida allowed those operatives to be trained to fly planes, most likely at a school certified by the state of florida...heck, florida even rigged the 2000 elections
why haven't we yet, as a country, dealt with the evil empire that is florida??
i mean, if an AQ bad man being in baghdad is reason to link AQ to sadam, then many AQ bad men living and training in florida should also link AQ to jeb bush
g
And Germany too . . .and Saudi Arabia too, and Indonesia, and Morrocco, and, of course, it hardly needs to be said, Franace too!!
The LINKS are so obviouse!!!!!
They are so obviouse, scraps of paper with 'phone numbers' supposedly written on them . . . proof of Governmental malfeasance on all their parts . . . especially those Floridians!!
Geb Bush is obviously part of AQ, and trying to take his brother down!!
Originally posted by pfflam
Geb Bush is obviously part of AQ, and trying to take his brother down!!
able and cain version 2.0
maybe it is the end of days?
g