• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

"What Fox News Channel Would Have Done To Rosa Parks"


So what she's saying is what you have a problem with? Even thought it's just pretty much just "Blah blah Bush sucks", therefore not radical along the lines of, say "America deserves to get blown to smithereens!"?

Then it is her opinion you can't stand to hear and you're just trying to find obscure ways of justifying it. Oh no, a soldier in Iraq might be so seriously depressed by the fact one random woman doesn't like the US president, that it affects his ability to work! Oh no, some terrorist might be encouraged by watching someone exercise their right to criticise their government - something that's not possible in Iran, or Saudi Arabia.

You forget that it's not Bush they hate, it's America. Kerry could be in office, and anti-Kerry speeches could be accused of doing the very same thing.
 
Last edited:

And you just stopped arguing your case and turned your attack on me.
You don't know what I can or cannot stand to hear or that I am finding obscure ways of justifying what I can't stand. I base my opinion of what the soldiers in Iraq think about rhetoric like CIndy Sheehan's on what they say they think about it, how it makes them feel, how it can be discouraging when it looks like more Americans are against them than with them, and our media coverage very often gives exactly that impression.

The terrorists hate us AND they hate the President who is the titular head of this country. Based on what they write and say and what is reported, they rejoice and fire bullets into the air everytime somebody, especially an American, says words of condemnation against this country and against the president re the war effort.

As far as what Cindy Sheehan says that I don't like, CNRedd provided a partial list up there. I suggest you read it and think about how that sounds to a guy on guard duty who doesn't know where the next car bomb is coming from.
 
I just posted this on another forum...works just as well here...

[SACASM RANT]
If the less than 2000 US soldiers killed is Bush's fault, as the left proclaims, then whose fault are the terrorists' deaths? Saddam? Bin Laden? Some Muslim Cleric that told them to go to Iraq?

Isn't there a "Cindy Sheehan" of the Muslim world, holding court outside of a mosque asking why do their sons have to die for an unjust war?

And where are the organizations that are anti-war? Why aren't they in Iraq scraming to the insurgency that there is no war that is justified? Why aren't the Veterans for Peace & CodePink telling the insurgents that "peace is the only way?"[/SACASM RANT]
 
Only 5% - 12% percent of the fighting is by insurgents. The rest are Iraqi's objecting to the occupation of their homeland.

http://www.truthout.org/docs_04/111704C.shtml
 
Billo_Really said:
Only 5% - 12% percent of the fighting is by insurgents. The rest are Iraqi's objecting to the occupation of their homeland.

http://www.truthout.org/docs_04/111704C.shtml
Click to expand...
Nice spin there. Did you read this?
The overwhelming majority of insurgents, several senior commanders said, are drawn from the tens of thousands of former government employees whose sympathies lie with the toppled regime of Saddam Hussein, unemployed "criminals" who find work laying roadside bombs for about $500 each and Iraqi religious extremists.
Yeah, just everyday innocent Iraqis objecting to the U.S.
 
Title of article:
Judging from fighters captured in Fallouja, all but about 5% are Iraqi, U.S. officials say.

You have taken this article out of context. It says that 5% of the insurgents are foreign, while the other 95% are made up of Saddam's old henchmen and such.
 
If Batman were real he'd kick your ass for using his name in conjunction with the spreading of a highly partisan political agenda seeking to justify the indefensible deaths of thousands of soldiers and civilians based on lies, and deception. For shame sir.
 
Batman lived his life by a code of helping those unable to help themselves. I figure he would be quite approving of our mission in Iraq. Hell, I bet he's be a full bird colonel at least.
 
Backpeddling a bit don't you think? Let me remind you what YOU wrote:
Originally Posted by cnredd
Name one time someone on this forum said she should be arrested or she is NOT ALLOWED to speak her mind....One....

No one has said that....NO ONE!...N-O O-N-E...nada...zip...zero....zilch....
Click to expand...
You made a statement that was untrue and I found one simple example to prove your statement was false, get over it. Pride is one of the seven deadly sins because it interferes with someones ability to be honest with themselves so they backpedal and try to twist the truth to serve their prideful purposes, you know?
Again, it sounds to me like Lance Armstrong in reverese. :mrgreen:
I do see you calling her a slur (Cindy Al-Sheehani's) to suggest that she's a Muslim terrorist? Modus operandi for you? You are free to have your opinion of what you believe her motive is. Since you've never lost a son to war it is quite presumptious for anyone to assume her or anyone's feelings. If it makes you feel better about your talking points presume things feel free, this is America, you can say anything you like.

Please show me where it says that people in this community said that she does not have the freedom to speak her mind? I realize that you enjoy ball busting me and you're trying to be confrontational but really, let's not waste each other's time on further "he said, she said" stuff.
cnredd said:
My argument still stands...and on solid ground....No one has said she should not have the freedom to speak her mind...
Click to expand...
No one is disagreeing with you?
cnredd said:
As long as they don't trample on other's property, and they do it in an orderly fashion as per the local laws, she could hang out there 'til she's blue in the face...that is not what dissenting views oppose her for...
Click to expand...
Who would disagree with such an obvious statement? That was my original point re "breaking the law." Sometimes towns will arrest groups of people for "illegal assembly" or demand that the group needs a permit to gather and protest, that is what I was referring to, not that Rove's Rangers were going to bust her for being there or for speaking her mind. If she attempted to passively resist etc. or something like that is again, what I meant.
This is what you wrote, why are you denying it, it's in the public record:
Originally Posted by cnredd
Name one time someone on this forum said she should be arrested or she is NOT ALLOWED to speak her mind....One....

No one has said that....NO ONE!...N-O O-N-E...nada...zip...zero....zilch....
Click to expand...
Last time, this is so redundant....READ MY POST...Did I say people in Debate Politics or did I say "some people"?
Originally Posted by cnredd
Name one time someone on this forum said she should be arrested or she is NOT ALLOWED to speak her mind....One....

No one has said that....NO ONE!...N-O O-N-E...nada...zip...zero....zilch....
Click to expand...
Seems pretty black and white to me, you know?
cnredd said:
That is mostly my fault...I shouldn't have asked you to find "one" source...I should have asked to find "some"...as your post suggests...I unintentionaly let you off the hook.
Click to expand...
Yes, you are correct, it is your fault, you finally got it right.
 
Very well written, BRAVO! You've captured the essence of how certain people use patriotism as a weapon against people who oppose their point of view.
 
cnredd said:
Exactly my point...Why is she supporting them?

It's like saying... "I am for the KKK but I don't hate black people or Jews"...ultimately you are supporting the enemy of blacks and Jews.
Click to expand...
How come you seem to be making this stuff up? I read her speech and in no way does it support the insurgents, period. Saying that she wants us out of Iraq now is not supporting the insurgency.

What is it that you don't get? You yourself posted her speech and highlighted points you thought that made her support the insurgency and I flat out disagree. Maybe you simply want to "demonize" her because you disagree with her so writing that she supports the insurgency makes you feel more justified in hating her? Is that it?

I read your post and I just can't help but think you're prejudiced against her, afterall you did call her a terrorist in previous posts, remember? (Cindy Al-Sheehani's)

On the one hand you claim that she's no better than Nazis or the KKK:
cnredd said:
It's like saying... "I am for the KKK but I don't hate black people or Jews"...ultimately you are supporting the enemy of blacks and Jews.
Click to expand...
On the other hand you call her Cindy Al-Sheehani? It reads like hyposcrisy to me, but that's just my humble opinion....
 
galenrox said:
Yes, and I bet he wouldn't have killed thousands of innocent civilians, let 1800 Americans die, and would've had an actual plan to win, and wouldn't be planning to stick around for 12 years!
Click to expand...

You know I don't get too bent out of shape about a lot of things. But when it comes to those brave young men and women putting it all on the line for their country, I think the very least Americans can do for them is let them know we have their back.

Knock around these sites a bit, bearing in mind that the killing was on a more selective and somewhat smaller scale after the early 1990's, but it continued with hands chopped off, lowering people feet first into vats of acid, other unbelievable torture, rape, murder, political executions, burying people alive (as was the case in many mass graves), and much more.

http://massgraves.info/

http://www.shianews.com/hi/articles/politics/0000374.php

Then take a look at this site...just load and watch the first screen....don’t enter the site. Really look at what is going on in Iraq at the hands of our military

http://www.glennbeck.com/tribute.htm

Then tell me again how Batman wouldn’t have approved of our mission there, or that the Iraqis will not be infinitely better off when we succeed there. And tell me again how the shrill negative voices of the naysayers at home aren’t trying to cut the legs out from under our commander in chief and the troops and giving encouragement to those who want them dead.
 

Notice how I gave a public admission on my own and without anyone having to chase me down for it? I saw the error, quickly acknowledged it, and accepted blame. That would be the opposite of "prideful purposes", wouldn't it be?

Wheras most people would think that would be an honorable thing to do, you seem to relish in my mistake in asking for one example, instead of asking for more. Gloating is yours....be happy in acknowledging that you have found one example....I'm sure that will be your basis for any arguments now...
 

Go back futher in this thread to see the article on the organizations standing with her in her protest....Thus, the KKK comment...
 
cnredd said:
Go back futher in this thread to see the article on the organizations standing with her in her protest....Thus, the KKK comment...
Click to expand...
So she is guilty by association, is that it? If White Supremists supported President Bush does that mean he is a White Supremist?

Read HER WORDS. Nowhere does she ever support terrorists, insurgents or any other Anti-American group.

One could argue that accusing her of guilt by association is simply a smokescreen for mudslinging? It can also be argued that by attacking her creditability one is attempting to discredit her feelings about the death of her son. Are you suggesting that her political ambitions outweigh her personal grief and that she is manipulating people's empathy for her loss to further her political agenda rather than her simply and sincerely her opposing the war and wanting to prevent other Americans for dying needlessly in Iraq?
 
cnredd said:
Notice how I gave a public admission on my own and without anyone having to chase me down for it? I saw the error, quickly acknowledged it, and accepted blame. That would be the opposite of "prideful purposes", wouldn't it be?
Click to expand...
Funny, I noticed that you seemed to write this:
To me that reads like you're trying to discredit my post, that my post did not meet your standards as to what you meant when you wrote:
Originally Posted by cnredd
Name one time someone on this forum said she should be arrested or she is NOT ALLOWED to speak her mind....One....

No one has said that....NO ONE!...N-O O-N-E...nada...zip...zero....zilch....
Click to expand...
Contrition is not what I read when I read your most recent posts, IMHO.
Are you serious? Do you want me to now list the multiple posts that you've written about me and others where you gloat? Is that necessary? I again smell HYPOCRISY in your words, though that is simply my opinion.

Look, I'm in no way interested in getting into a flame war with you, we've been through that already and it's pointless. Let's just drop this and move on?
 
26 X World Champs said:
So she is guilty by association, is that it? If White Supremists supported President Bush does that mean he is a White Supremist?

Read HER WORDS. Nowhere does she ever support terrorists, insurgents or any other Anti-American group.
Click to expand...
Saying you support someone and standing with them in an in particular cause ae two different things....That is absurd logic...

A lot of people wanted Kerry over Bush as President....Kerry is a Democrat...Sen. Byrd supported Kerry...Sen. Byrd is a Democrat...Sen. Byrd was in the Klan...People voted for Sen. Byrd...

Does that make Kerry and everyone who voted for him a supporter of the Klan?...Of course not!

You talk of Cindy's grief....Do the organizations that stand by her have that same grief?...No...They have a political agenda, and she is willfully letting them use her platform(grieving mother) in an attempt to get what they have to say out to the public....

You ever see a protest...let's say the protest is about saving the whales...and a group shows up with signs that say "Fur Is Murder" and "Bush Is Hitler"?...They're groups that just go to where the cameras are...They have their own agenda...

If Cindy was sincere, she would say to ALL groups..."This is personal...stay out of my business!"...


Couldn't of said it better myself...That is EXACTLY what I'm saying...
 
26 X World Champs said:
Let's just drop this and move on?
Click to expand...

dot org?:smile:

Look at my "public admission"....I said "Gloating is yours"....Just as you have claimed that "I gloat"...It's an agreement, not an argument....No flame intention....
 
Last edited:
cnredd said:
Go back futher in this thread to see the article on the organizations standing with her in her protest....Thus, the KKK comment...
Click to expand...

Okay, so she doesn't like Bush. Terrorists don't like Bush. This makes her an accidental supporter of terrorists? :lol: So, if you maybe share a single, harmless opinion with a bunch of whackos, then you can be blamed for "encouraging" them?

Hmm. As I recall, you're anti-abortion. So are nutcases who blow up anti-abortion clinics. Would I be illogical and foolish enough to accuse you of "standing by" those idiots? No.


So you'd be happy to suppress her opinions in the media, which she has every right to say, out of some paranoid fear that a lunatic halfway across the world might gloat over it? Yet you don't see what's so ironic about that, when you want the US to be championing democracy in the Middle East?
 
Last edited:

Start reading previous posts...I said the same thing...


This is NOT what makes her back the insurgency...its agreeing with their political agenda that does.

Champs wrote this earlier...

If White Supremists supported President Bush does that mean he is a White Supremist?

Now the answer is obviously no....But I bet your mind would change if Bush had a Klan rally on the White House lawn, wouldn't it?

That is what Cindy is doing. Holding court for organizations that back the insurgency. I've already shown the article backing that fact up...
 
But how is she holding court for organisations that back the insurgency? In saying that she dislikes Bush?

She might agree with their political agenda in that Bush is an arsehole. Big bloody deal. As I said, if Kerry was in power, then instead they'd think Kerry was an arsehole. In that case, you'd be agreeing with them on that. Would that mean you were holding court for them?

The fact is she does not agree with the majority of their political agenda - namely, that Islam is superior to all other religions and the West deserves to be destroyed. As I've said, you agree with parts of the same political agenda as those crazy abortion-clinic bombers, too. Does that mean you agree with everything they believe in and hold court for them? Hell no.
 

A retraction IS IN ORDER! How F'n DARE you!
 
...but you're against abortion, aren't you?
 
vergiss said:
...but you're against abortion, aren't you?
Click to expand...

My "political agenda" is NOT against abortion...I've said the only thing I want stopped is my tax money going to it. Any comparison using the killing of abortion doctors is right up their with comparisons of Nazis.....

To bring it up as if I had the same mindset in insulting, demeaning, as you would say; "demonizing"...

Any credibility you had is gone...
 
To be pro-life and anti-abortion is fine. That is not the same thing as harrassing women or bombing abortion clinics. To equate the two is ludicrous and inflammatory.

To oppose the war is fine. That is not the same thing as getting in front of television cameras day after day denouncing the president, the troops, and the mission in Iraq, all of which the terrorists can use to boost the morale of their co-thugs. To equate the two is ludicrous and about as short-sighted as it gets.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Menu
Log in
Register
Cookies are required to use this site. You must accept them to continue using the site. Learn more…