Isn't this whole thread about the US dropping Cuba (a state) off the terror blacklist.why would i have to "bear" your false assertion?...your lies carry no burden for me to bear.
again, asking me to prove a negative is bad form.. I can't prove something doesn't exist....
it is simple fact that State Terrorism is not legally recognized domestically or internationally by anyone.... period.
this is a very easy concept to grasp...and you're not a dumb guy....you'll eventually understand.
Isn't this whole thread about the US dropping Cuba (a state) off the terror blacklist.
Only in the minds of the feeble is there no such thing as "state terrorism", I provided links to the definition thereof. And, showed you that a sponsor is RESPONSIBLE for the person or group supported.
Nope, but apparently you have, because the U.S. now trades with Germany despite once fighting a war with the Nazis. Answer the question: If Germany were 90 miles away from the United States, like Cuba, do you believe we should cease trading with them because of the history with the Nazis?History, you missed it.
Nope, but apparently you have, because the U.S. now trades with Germany despite once fighting a war with the Nazis. Answer the question: If Germany were 90 miles away from the United States, like Cuba, do you believe we should cease trading with them because of the history with the Nazis?
1.) No its exactly what I'm doing. You said the reasoning for Cuba on the list is because the are a "communist police state". So is China. Why isnt China? Why do we have diplomatic relations with them? If we are using the same reasoning for Cuba should it also not apply to another state that can be described as a "communist police state" as well?
Well no ****. Thanks for telling me the blatantly obvious.
So essentially your reasoning and logic for not establishing relations with Cuba is, "BECAUSE I SAY SO!"
So what makes Cuba different? Pass conflicts? Why can we have open diplomatic relations with China, and even have them as one of our biggest trading partners? You gave past examples in relation to Cuba as "police state" being "communist". China is ran by a Communist Party. They have a massive police force. They also have been in direct combat with US troops in Korea...I also said every country is different, what applies to one may be totally different for another. You kind of missed that part. You can see that, can't you? That China and Cuba are different? If you really think about it, you may be able find a difference or two between those two nations that we may consider when dealing with them.
:lamo Why do you think this conversation is even happening?Um, it's seems that "the blatantly obvious" is not all that obvious to you, and needs to be spelled out.
Nope. Again, more misleading and twisting of my point. Completely wrong. I'm starting to think you are just not comprehending things that well. So be it.
Listen, you are really getting your clock cleaned in this thread. You might want to reconsider your position at this point.
From your link it states "Countries determined by the Secretary of State to have repeatedly provided support for acts of international terrorism are designated pursuant to three laws: section 6(j) of the Export Administration Act, section 40 of the Arms Export Control Act, and section 620A of the Foreign Assistance Act." When we look at all the Acts provided the US has fit all of them to a T. Now I have all 3 acts in pdf format so I cannot copy each act with the corresponding claim that also ties the US.no, it's about dropping them from the list of State Sponsors of Terrorism...
State Sponsors of Terrorism
The CIA training and aiding the individuals who bombed a civillian airline comes under all 3 Acts. Without going into the deatails because we would be here for days, we find the US is in fact a State Sponsor of Terrorism. So no matter which definition you want to give us the US itself still falls into that category.
Yes you are, I provided documentation. Care to actually refute it.Ah, we are the terrorists? Incredible.
So, what's your deal there? America hater? Anti America? We stole this country from Mexico? Or is it the Indians? You a communist? Come on, fess up. Lay your cards on the table.Yes you are, I provided documentation. Care to actually refute it.
So, what's your deal there? America hater? Anti America? We stole this country from Mexico? Or is it the Indians? You a communist? Come on, fess up. Lay your cards on the table.
I am someone who looks at the facts. I could like you stick my head in the sand and continully shout out America is great without even challenging or investigating or researching what someone claims is real or not. Ignorance is bliss. To me yopu're someone who is worse than the person who knows all the horrible attrocities commited or supported by the US but continues to make excuses. You and people like you are willfully being ignorant. Just remember when you do decide to pull your fingers out of your ears and remove the blindfold your whole world will never be the same.
Well, our little experiment in freedom an democracy is going pretty well so far. Granted, times like these, with Obama in the White House, we are at our worst, leadership wise.
To paraphrase Churchill, we have the worst form of government, except for all the others out there.
You mean like before we were forced by the government to buy healthcare? Or before there was an income tax? Or before the government wasted hundreds of millions of dollars on left wing pet projects? Gee, I'll have to think about that!Can you name a time in American history when American citizens were more free than they are today (including women and minorities)?
I just did.I really don't think you can, unless you consider as tyranny allowing LGBT's to be every bit as free as everyone else.
You are absolutely cluless if you think the letter after his name matters to a true conservative. That's for democrats.And when it comes to Obama, if he'd had an (R) behind his name, with the accomplishments he's had, y'all would be calling to have his face added to Mt. Rushmore. But since he's got that (D), Thou Shalt Never consider anything he has ever done as good or right for anyone, ever.
From your link it states "Countries determined by the Secretary of State to have repeatedly provided support for acts of international terrorism are designated pursuant to three laws: section 6(j) of the Export Administration Act, section 40 of the Arms Export Control Act, and section 620A of the Foreign Assistance Act." When we look at all the Acts provided the US has fit all of them to a T. Now I have all 3 acts in pdf format so I cannot copy each act with the corresponding claim that also ties the US.
My first few links provided documentation on how the CIA trained and armed para-military groups which falls under all 3 Acts. The CIA training and aiding the individuals who bombed a civillian airline comes under all 3 Acts. Without going into the deatails because we would be here for days, we find the US is in fact a State Sponsor of Terrorism. So no matter which definition you want to give us the US itself still falls into that category.
nah.. only the feeble minded conflate being a sponsor of terrorism with being terrorists themselves.... it's a good thing that no nation or authoritative body on earth listens to the feeble minded.
Is Britain 90 miles off our coast?
Isn't it great how our president makes nice with murderous regimes like Cuba and Iran?
You just jump all over the place with your arguments, don't you?
One question: Did you vote for the president who made kissy faces with the murderous king of Saudi Arabia?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?