The All-White Elephant in the Room................

B

Bruzilla

Guest
don't look now but you are at the helm of the SS Pathetic. :rolleyes: Is your last name Huffington?
So... I'm the only one in the room is asking that people see evidence before blindly accepting claims made during political campaigns, and I am the pathetic one? :lmao: Man... if I didn't know any better I would guess you've got that video of how the World Trade Centers were blown up with controlled explosions going on in the background while you write.
 

aps45819

24/7 Single Dad
I'm nto disputing the fact that Wright made those comments last year. All I'm asking for is to see some proof that he's been making them for 20 years.
Unless the 911/CIA Aids/etc. statements are the result of a revelation or spiritual epiphany, they're long held beliefs.
I think they're long held beliefs.
 
B

Bruzilla

Guest
Unless the 911/CIA Aids/etc. statements are the result of a revelation or spiritual epiphany, they're long held beliefs.
I think they're long held beliefs.
Well, the 9/11 statements were held by far more people than Wright, including more than a few religious leaders on the right. Just ask Mr. Falwell and Robertson.

The genesis of the CIA AIDS deal was the KGB, who spread that rumor around 1980s Africa as a means of trying to stir anti-American sentiment. It made its way back here, and by and large most people took it as the baloney it was... but to be honest, I wasn't part of the population that the government used as involuntary guinea pigs on VD research either. I'm guessing that if the US Government had purposefully singled out white people in Southern Maryland to be infected with syphallis for 40 years, that maybe white people from Southern Maryland might be more inclined to believe the AIDS story than the population as a whole.
 

Pete

Repete
So... I'm the only one in the room is asking that people see evidence before blindly accepting claims made during political campaigns, and I am the pathetic one? :lmao: Man... if I didn't know any better I would guess you've got that video of how the World Trade Centers were blown up with controlled explosions going on in the background while you write.
No you are the only one who completely ignores it when it is given to you again and again. :lmao: I personally have given you the links to it twice with dates.

But you are right Bru, you are an intellectual giant and it is all of us who think you have some parasitic brain infection who are wrong. :yay:

You remind me more and more of JPC everytime you post. :yay: :killingme
 

Bann

Doris Day meets Lady Gaga
PREMO Member
No you are the only one who completely ignores it when it is given to you again and again. :lmao: I personally have given you the links to it twice with dates.

But you are right Bru, you are an intellectual giant and it is all of us who think you have some parasitic brain infection who are wrong. :yay:

You remind me more and more of JPC everytime you post. :yay: :killingme

I posted links in numerous threads and he ignored them. Or, of course, he totally rejected them as completely unworthy and disreputable since only his sources are 100% "bonafide".

He flat out left the thread where I noted the discrepancy in his "gas tax holiday in Florida" rant.
 

This_person

Well-Known Member
Well, the 9/11 statements were held by far more people than Wright, including more than a few religious leaders on the right. Just ask Mr. Falwell and Robertson.
What do they have to do with anything? Were those beliefs, when spouted, not soundly critisized by people? What presidential candidate called either of these people their spiritual leader, had them as an initial part of their campaign staff, went to their church for 20 years, gave tens of thousands of dollars to them in support of their thoughts and ideas, were married by them, had their children baptised by them, and did NOT call them out on those bad statements until it was a political necessity?
 

Larry Gude

Strung Out
Well...

...if anyone cares about the truth, the chickens did, in fact, come home to roost on 9/11.

If we simply read OBL's manifesto, his rational for attacking us, you'll find that he attacked us for exactly the reasons Falwell and Robertson said; our corrupt values and culture and our arrogance that we do as we please in the Muslim Holy lands, standing military, supporting a corrupt regime, etc.

That does not make the attacks right or fair or just. This is simple statement of fact.

Wright went just as far and for the same reason; Falwell, Robertson, Wright, they all said, basically, that we deserved in.

That is the conversation we never dare to have.
 

vraiblonde

Board Mommy
PREMO Member
Patron
That is the conversation we never dare to have.
We can have the conversation right now.

Osama saying that the 9/11 attacks were retaliation for our corrupt values, cultures, yadda yadda, is like saying a woman was beaten, raped and killed because she was wearing provocative clothing - "asking" for it.

Some mental case may indeed say that he murdered a woman because of what he perceived to be her loose morals, but he's a mental case. If he weren't, he wouldn't have attacked and killed the woman in the first place.

So when some observer (say, Rev. Wright or Ron Paul) says, "Well, she was attacked and killed because of her loose morals," that means they are mental cases as well. Sure, it's the reason the killer himself gave for his violent act, but it doesn't mean it's a credible reason. And, indeed, anyone who confirms the mental case's excuse is blaming the victim.

So do we say, "Young women - you are no longer allowed to wear skimpy clothing, because some mental case is offended by it and has said he will kill you if you do"? Or do we lock up the mental case? Do we say, "Well...I mean, she WAS wearing skimpy clothing..."? Or do we say it doesn't matter what she wears, you're still not allowed to kill her?
 

Larry Gude

Strung Out
That is a terrible...

We can have the conversation right now.

Osama saying that the 9/11 attacks were retaliation for our corrupt values, cultures, yadda yadda, is like saying a woman was beaten, raped and killed because she was wearing provocative clothing - "asking" for it.

Some mental case may indeed say that he murdered a woman because of what he perceived to be her loose morals, but he's a mental case. If he weren't, he wouldn't have attacked and killed the woman in the first place.

So when some observer (say, Rev. Wright or Ron Paul) says, "Well, she was attacked and killed because of her loose morals," that means they are mental cases as well. Sure, it's the reason the killer himself gave for his violent act, but it doesn't mean it's a credible reason. And, indeed, anyone who confirms the mental case's excuse is blaming the victim.

So do we say, "Young women - you are no longer allowed to wear skimpy clothing, because some mental case is offended by it and has said he will kill you if you do"? Or do we lock up the mental case? Do we say, "Well...I mean, she WAS wearing skimpy clothing..."? Or do we say it doesn't matter what she wears, you're still not allowed to kill her?

...analogy and not much of an effort on your part.

I think it is fine for you say the US can go anywhere in the world and do anything we like and no one has a right to take issue with it and if they do they are crazy. I disagree, but, if that's how you feel, that's fine.

I think it is fine for you to say Muslims are crazy people to think their religion means what it says about foreign armies in their Holy Lands. I think they're crazy, too, but, I can't take issue with their beliefs being what they are. I can't blame a rabid dog for biting me if I stick my fingers through his fence. I sure as hell can't claim to be some innocent babe in a thong simply minding my own business.

I've never seen people mob the streets in celebration of a rape of an innocent women. I have seen people mob the streets in celebration of their sworn enemy getting attacked. You ever see people take to the streets to celebrate a rape?

You're making a value judgement that our way is better and we have a right and perhaps an obligation to impose it on them. Maybe we do. I don't think so, but, maybe we do. Shouldn't we at least understand how they think, how they see us before we go forcing change on them?

Obviously, you haven't read Osama's fatwah on us. He sounds a lot like Wright and Falwell and Robertson in condemning the US. It's not just our culture they all take issue with, it's the support for the Saudi Royal family and how their way of life is suffering from our influence. To them, this is a life and death struggle, crazy or not.

Now, even if your analogy holds water, that we, the US were just some innocent, scantily clad woman walking past the wrong maniac who then raped us and killed us, the question still needs to be answered; are we right in our actions and intentions in the Middle East the last 40 years?
 

vraiblonde

Board Mommy
PREMO Member
Patron
I think it is fine for you say the US can go anywhere in the world and do anything we like and no one has a right to take issue with it and if they do they are crazy. I disagree, but, if that's how you feel, that's fine.
I wasn't aware that we had invaded and colonized the Middle East. It was my understanding that the leaders of those countries had to okay it or specifically invite us, and we couldn't just set up shop in some foreign country without their approval.

Please correct me if I'm wrong.

It's not just our culture they all take issue with, it's the support for the Saudi Royal family and how their way of life is suffering from our influence.
Great! Tell them to take it up with the Saudi Royal family.

I was unaware that we allow a bunch of terrorists to dictate our culture, values and foreign policy. Should we always do that, or just in the case of Islamic terrorists?
 

MMDad

Lem Putt
Great! Tell them to take it up with the Saudi Royal family.
:yay: If Obama really felt the way he claims to, we would have seen airliners crashing into buildings in Riyadh, not NYC.

Our presence in the region is his excuse. If we left tomorrow, he would find a different reason to continue.

I don't understand why people actually believe the staments that come from OBL.
 

Larry Gude

Strung Out
*lol*...

I wasn't aware that we had invaded and colonized the Middle East. It was my understanding that the leaders of those countries had to okay it or specifically invite us, and we couldn't just set up shop in some foreign country without their approval.

Please correct me if I'm wrong.


Great! Tell them to take it up with the Saudi Royal family.

I was unaware that we allow a bunch of terrorists to dictate our culture, values and foreign policy. Should we always do that, or just in the case of Islamic terrorists?
...you're right; we've been over there in force since '91 just wearing our skimpy outfits, catching some rays hoping to not get jumped. And I'm sure I just missed Saddam's hand written invitation to come on down! The Taliban, rulers of Afghanistan until we showed up, don't know how to write, so, their invite was probably a phone call. No, wait. A smoke signal?

:lmao:

Osama and other fundamentalists, have been taking it up with the Royal's, those models of fair play, those lovers of freedom and liberty and American Idle, for decades now. It's all in Osama's fatwa who he doesn't like and why.
 

Larry Gude

Strung Out
What's...

: I don't understand why people actually believe the staments that come from OBL.
...not to believe? He means it. That he is inept and weak is another story. It was a HUGE blunder on his part to attack us on 9/11. Of course, our response has helped him argue what out true intentions are.
 

Larry Gude

Strung Out
Touchdown!!!

I
I was unaware that we allow a bunch of terrorists to dictate our culture, values and foreign policy. Should we always do that, or just in the case of Islamic terrorists?
You get it! OUR culture and values right here at home, in OUR land. Not his. Not theirs. OURS.
 
Top