• 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"

cnredd

Major General Big Lug
DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 5, 2005
Messages
8,682
Reaction score
262
Location
Philadelphia,PA
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Conservative
AlbqOwl said:
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.

Thank you.
 

SKILMATIC

Banned
Joined
Aug 11, 2005
Messages
3,407
Reaction score
0
Location
San Diego
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
Re:

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

I dont know how anyone can equate the story of cindy sheehan to rosa parks? It may have some common things like refusing to obey laws, but slavery is a whole entirely different issue than that of sheehans. But ohwell this is a waiste of time debating casue in no way is this debate going to help the welfare of our world. That is a fact.
 

AlbqOwl

DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 12, 2005
Messages
23,578
Reaction score
12,384
Location
New Mexico
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Independent
Re:

SKILMATIC said:
I dont know how anyone can equate the story of cindy sheehan to rosa parks? It may have some common things like refusing to obey laws, but slavery is a whole entirely different issue than that of sheehans. But ohwell this is a waiste of time debating casue in no way is this debate going to help the welfare of our world. That is a fact.

Geez, Skilmatic, you want these discussions to make the world a better place? :lol: (Seriously, I wish they could, but I'll settle for a forum that requires me to understand and defend my own notions, ideas, impressions, and conclusions so that I might help more than I screw things up.)

Rosa Parks mission was noble and necessary to change skewed notions about humanity and basic rights. I think most of those who oppose Cindy Sheehan's behavior would have been right there in the front of the bus with their arms around Rosa's shoulders.

And you're right there is no comparison beween a Rosa Parks and a Cindy Sheehan.
 

BWG

DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 29, 2005
Messages
4,373
Reaction score
1,602
Location
South Coast
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Re:

AlbqOwl said:
Rosa Parks mission was noble and necessary to change skewed notions about humanity and basic rights. I think most of those who oppose Cindy Sheehan's behavior would have been right there in the front of the bus with their arms around Rosa's shoulders.

And you're right there is no comparison beween a Rosa Parks and a Cindy Sheehan.


I think you lost sight of what this thread is about. It wasn't about comparing Rosa Parks to Cindy Sheehan. It was about how Fox News and conservative commentators would attack someone such as Rosa Parks if they had been around in 1955.

The statement I want to address is this one...."I think most of those who oppose Cindy Sheehan's behavior would have been right there in the front of the bus with their arms around Rosa's shoulders".

I don't know how old you are, what race you are or how you feel about racial equality (or anything else for that matter), but I have a feeling you weren't around in the '50s or '60s. There weren't any white Alabama faces with their arms around Rosa Parks shoulders that December 1st. There wasn't any non-black supporters urging her on (except maybe some 'outside aggitators'). There were black people discouraging her, because of what they feared might happen to her. Things in the south are a LOT different today than they were 50 years ago, a LOT!!

I'm not trying to put you down or anything like that. It's just one of those 'you had to be there' type things.
 

AlbqOwl

DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 12, 2005
Messages
23,578
Reaction score
12,384
Location
New Mexico
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Independent
Re:

BWG said:
I think you lost sight of what this thread is about. It wasn't about comparing Rosa Parks to Cindy Sheehan. It was about how Fox News and conservative commentators would attack someone such as Rosa Parks if they had been around in 1955.

The statement I want to address is this one...."I think most of those who oppose Cindy Sheehan's behavior would have been right there in the front of the bus with their arms around Rosa's shoulders".

I don't know how old you are, what race you are or how you feel about racial equality (or anything else for that matter), but I have a feeling you weren't around in the '50s or '60s. There weren't any white Alabama faces with their arms around Rosa Parks shoulders that December 1st. There wasn't any non-black supporters urging her on (except maybe some 'outside aggitators'). There were black people discouraging her, because of what they feared might happen to her. Things in the south are a LOT different today than they were 50 years ago, a LOT!!

I'm not trying to put you down or anything like that. It's just one of those 'you had to be there' type things.

Oh I was around enough then, and I know very well what you are talking about. But the media would not have given Cindy Sheehan the coverage then that she is getting now. And the media was quite kind to Rosa Parks, and if you can show me a single racist statement or policy coming out of Fox News, I would like to show it to all their multi-racial staff including anchors.

You see the war in Iraq didn't start out that way, but now it is about giving freedom to oppressed people that didn't have that. and saying to those who would deny it to them that their cruelty and prejudices will not stand. That's what the whole Rosa Parks thing was about, and yes, Fox news would have been leading the pack on her behalf.

The Cindy Sheehan story is not even close to that.

You would be amazed at how many of us old southern conservatives marched with Dr. Martin Luther King. Those who opposed Rosa Parks were from a different time and a different culture and they have had to learn. Most of them have now learned.
 

SKILMATIC

Banned
Joined
Aug 11, 2005
Messages
3,407
Reaction score
0
Location
San Diego
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
Geez, Skilmatic, you want these discussions to make the world a better place?

Yep casue if I can get people to understand common sense(not the book) then we will be a better world for it.

but I'll settle for a forum that requires me to understand and defend my own notions, ideas, impressions, and conclusions

Good now lets feed off this. How are your notions, ideas and stuff on rosa parks correlating with cindy sheehan going to do to your mental stability? Probably confuse the living witts out of you like it is me everytime I look at this thread. But other than that I agree
 

AliG

Member
Joined
Jul 30, 2005
Messages
50
Reaction score
0
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Why does anyone care about Cindy Sheenan or her haters call her 'Cindy Al-Sheehani'???
(her muslim name or something....)
Why is it such a big deal, why do you want her to shut up?? Just ignore her if you feel so freckin threatened or you think she is stupid??

Could someone answer this please:2razz:
 

AlbqOwl

DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 12, 2005
Messages
23,578
Reaction score
12,384
Location
New Mexico
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Independent
AliG said:
Why does anyone care about Cindy Sheenan or her haters call her 'Cindy Al-Sheehani'???
(her muslim name or something....)
Why is it such a big deal, why do you want her to shut up?? Just ignore her if you feel so freckin threatened or you think she is stupid??

Could someone answer this please:2razz:

I want her to shut up--mind you that is my preference and not my demand--because she is giving aid, comfort, video shots, and sound bites to a hate filled, militant group of nut cases who would subject an entire region or perhaps the entire world to their will. The name al-Sheehan was an attempt at humor that incorporated that. What Sheehan is doing is giving aid and encouragement and psychological ammunition to terrorists while demoralizing, discouraging, and defaming the military who are trying their damndest to stop those same terrorists.

I support the military. I oppose the terrorists. I think Sheehan's tactics put the military at higher risk and are helpful to the terrorists. And that's why I think it is such a big deal. And yes, I think she is stupid to do it.
 

cnredd

Major General Big Lug
DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 5, 2005
Messages
8,682
Reaction score
262
Location
Philadelphia,PA
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Conservative
AliG said:
Why does anyone care about Cindy Sheenan or her haters call her 'Cindy Al-Sheehani'???
(her muslim name or something....)
Why is it such a big deal, why do you want her to shut up?? Just ignore her if you feel so freckin threatened or you think she is stupid??

Could someone answer this please:2razz:

Actually, I'd have some pity on her if she didn't let the calvalcade of cameras, organizations, and media pundits into her "personal" agenda of meeting with the President...

I think you would agree that she would have had a MUCH easier time of meeting with GWB if she kept a low profile...They could have done it behind closed doors and no one would have known the diff.

But nooooooooooooooo.....Cindy Al-Sheehani has turned this into something PT Barnum would be embarrassed of...She willingly stands by organizations that back the Iraqi insurgency....you know...the ones that killed her son...That IS what this is supposed to be about, right?

So through her actions, she becomes a chewtoy...If people are so freaked out yelling about the Freedom of Speech, then they should have NO PROBLEMS with responses to it.

Hence, from another post earlier...I'm proud of this one:twisted:...

cnredd said:
Just read this article....

The cnredd Times August 22, 2005
by cnredd

Earlier today, Cindy Al-Sheehani continued her campaign of hatred by claiming the NHL lockout was all a Republican conspiracy and the Jews should get out of New York. She then pulled out a banner saying "Everyone is Hitler" and said elephants around the country should be put down because of the hate-symbolism it represents...

Then she kicked a puppy...
 

vergiss

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 31, 2005
Messages
2,356
Reaction score
1
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Slightly Liberal
cnredd said:
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...

What the hell?! Did you even read my posts? I was using it as an example of demonstrating that you can share a basic opinion with an extremist, without actually being an extremist - much less supporting them. My point was that it would be stupid to compare the two, as you are with Sheehan.

I wrote:

vergiss said:
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.

vergiss said:
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.

Next time you whinge about me comparing mindsets, maybe you should make sure that I actually am comparing mindsets.

However, seeing as you yourself refered to such an action as "To bring it up as if I had the same mindset in insulting, demeaning, as you would say; "demonizing"...", maybe you ought to sympathise with how those of us who dislike Bush feel when ridiculously accused of standing with terrorists?

Also, interesting to see that you're ignoring my point about Kerry - that if he were in power, he'd be the ones terrorists hated. Therefore, would speaking against him be "giving comfort to the enemy"?
 

Middleground

Fly Eagles Fly!
Bartender
DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 15, 2005
Messages
27,746
Reaction score
14,276
Location
Canada's Capital
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Progressive
AlbqOwl said:
I support the military. I oppose the terrorists. I think Sheehan's tactics put the military at higher risk and are helpful to the terrorists. And that's why I think it is such a big deal. And yes, I think she is stupid to do it.

I've read this a bunch of times (from different sources), but cannot figure out how. Could you please explain this?
 

AlbqOwl

DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 12, 2005
Messages
23,578
Reaction score
12,384
Location
New Mexico
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Independent
Originally Posted by AlbqOwl
I support the military. I oppose the terrorists. I think Sheehan's tactics put the military at higher risk and are helpful to the terrorists. And that's why I think it is such a big deal. And yes, I think she is stupid to do it.

Middleground said:
I've read this a bunch of times (from different sources), but cannot figure out how. Could you please explain this?

Consider how you would feel if you knew you were engaged in a noble effort, but every morning when you got up, all day long at work, and again every night the newspapers and television was filled with people uttering expletive deletives about your leaders, your mission, your purpose, and the process by which you were implementing them. Further if any member of your team screws up, it is played in the paper as if your whole outfit is incompetent, corrupt, or evil? How long could you work like that before you became frustrated, depressed, discouraged, and angry? Would you do your job more efficiently and effectively in a climate like that?

People like Cindy Sheehan and her ilk do that to those brave men and women who are putting it all on the line for us. They say they are supporting the troops. They aren't. And it sure isn't smart to think they are.

Now consider if you were an outgunned, outmanned, and war weary terrorist who is just about out of options. But every morning when you get up, all day long, and again at night you read in American newspapers and see mostly American people condemning the President and demanding that the troops come home. From what you see ALL Americans agree that the USA is losing and the situation is hopeless. Would you be more or less encouraged to keep on fighting?

That's how.

It isn't a matter of what is legal and what is illegal, what is withing our rights to do and what is not within our rights to do. We all have the right to be stupid, to ruin our lives, to be complete a-holes and jerks, but not everything that it is legal or within our right to do is a good thing to do.
 
Last edited:

cnredd

Major General Big Lug
DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 5, 2005
Messages
8,682
Reaction score
262
Location
Philadelphia,PA
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Conservative
AlbqOwl said:
Consider how you would feel if you knew you were engaged in a noble effort, but every morning when you got up, all day long at work, and again every night the newspapers and television was filled with people uttering expletive deletives about your leaders, your mission, your purpose, and the process by which you were implementing them. Further if any member of your team screws up, it is played in the paper as if your whole outfit is incompetent, corrupt, or evil? How long could you work like that before you became frustrated, depressed, discouraged, and angry? Would you do your job more efficiently and effectively in a climate like that?

People like Cindy Sheehan and her ilk do that to those brave men and women who are putting it all on the line for us. They say they are supporting the troops. They aren't. And it sure isn't smart to think they are.

Now consider if you were an outgunning, outmanned, and war weary terrorist who is just about out of options. But every morning when you get up, all day long, and again at night you read in American newspapers and see on American people mostly people condemning the President and demanding that the troops come home. From what you see ALL Americans agree that the USA is losing and the situation is hopeless. Would you be more or less encouraged to keep on fighting?

That's how.

It isn't a matter of what is legal and what is illegal, what is withing our rights to do and what is not within our rights to do. We all have the right to be stupid, to ruin our lives, to be complete a-holes and jerks, but not everything that it is legal or within our right to do is a good thing to do.

:bravo:

Why is this so damn hard to understand?!?!?
 

freethought6t9

Active member
Joined
Aug 15, 2005
Messages
350
Reaction score
0
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal
I'm sorry but I really can't be bothered to read all of the strange remarks posted on this thread, Fox News supporting Rosa Parks!!! They're conservative attack dogs and I doubt that they would. Not that no other conservatives would mind.

But the point I'm replying to is one I've heard many times, that the peaceful left are helping the terrorists. I find this so ridiculous it doesn't even pass the giggle test. What do you think drives up terrorist recruitment; Ms. Sheehan asking for peace, or George Bush demanding strength, American liberals condemning prisoner abuse or the abuses themselves, and if the American media ignored these abuses then that would provide more fodder for Al Qaedas recruitment drives.

The fact is peace protests undercut the point of fantics like UBL. They don't hate all Americans. They hate the corrupt policies of the U.S. and their attempts to block democracy in the region, they hate the U.S. for its support of brutal regimes like Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Iraq and Israel, they hate the corruption of U.S. corporations and the theft of the regions wealth, which pours into the West. But most of all they hate the hypocrisy of the U.S. elite as it talks of peace and democracy while it bombs their homes and props up their oppressors. And they also hate that they have no legal recourse as the U.S. dominates any international organisations that could provide support or justice. This is why they hate America, not Cindy Sheehan.
 

aquapub

DP Veteran
Joined
Apr 16, 2005
Messages
7,317
Reaction score
344
Location
America (A.K.A., a red state)
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
If Rosa Parks had attended rallies in support of terrorists, said that, "America is not worth dying for," and staged an adolescent, irrational protest demanding that the President himself come meet her and apologize for her son's CHOICE to fight in a war that took his life, the public should have heard about it.

Rosa Parks had a justifiable argument and was only demanding what was reasonable. Cindy Sheenhan has BS Michael Moore propaganda and is being completely unreasonable. She is an opportunistic hysteria-peddling left-winger who has been invested in the anti-war movement since way before her son got involved. She is misrepresenting herself (as is the rule with liberals) grossly, and the public deserves to know.

Republican attack machine? Please. The liberal news media has done far worse than this for decades to conservatives who were- unlike Cindy Sheenhan- actually sincere, forthcoming, and credible.
 

freethought6t9

Active member
Joined
Aug 15, 2005
Messages
350
Reaction score
0
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal
If Cindy Sheehan has been involved in the anti-war movement since before her sons death, why have conservatives accused her of flip-flopping and why didn't she come out when he did die, but waited a year,and why is the Downing Street Memo so important to her arguments.

She has presented herself as a greiving mother who does not support this war for perfectly valid reasons, whats untrue about this?
 

26 X World Champs

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 6, 2005
Messages
7,536
Reaction score
429
Location
Upper West Side of Manhattan (10024)
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal
AlbqOwl said:
The name al-Sheehan was an attempt at humor that incorporated that. What Sheehan is doing is giving aid and encouragement and psychological ammunition to terrorists while demoralizing, discouraging, and defaming the military who are trying their damndest to stop those same terrorists.
NO! It was a racial slur, not an attempt at humor at all. To condone comments like that is to condone any "joke" made at the expense of nationalities or races. Anyone who accepts slurs as jokes is equally guilty of using this slur to demean.

You know?
 

AlbqOwl

DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 12, 2005
Messages
23,578
Reaction score
12,384
Location
New Mexico
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Independent
freethought6t9 said:
I'm sorry but I really can't be bothered to read all of the strange remarks posted on this thread, Fox News supporting Rosa Parks!!! They're conservative attack dogs and I doubt that they would. Not that no other conservatives would mind.

But the point I'm replying to is one I've heard many times, that the peaceful left are helping the terrorists. I find this so ridiculous it doesn't even pass the giggle test. What do you think drives up terrorist recruitment; Ms. Sheehan asking for peace, or George Bush demanding strength, American liberals condemning prisoner abuse or the abuses themselves, and if the American media ignored these abuses then that would provide more fodder for Al Qaedas recruitment drives.

The fact is peace protests undercut the point of fantics like UBL. They don't hate all Americans. They hate the corrupt policies of the U.S. and their attempts to block democracy in the region, they hate the U.S. for its support of brutal regimes like Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Iraq and Israel, they hate the corruption of U.S. corporations and the theft of the regions wealth, which pours into the West. But most of all they hate the hypocrisy of the U.S. elite as it talks of peace and democracy while it bombs their homes and props up their oppressors. And they also hate that they have no legal recourse as the U.S. dominates any international organisations that could provide support or justice. This is why they hate America, not Cindy Sheehan.

That's why they use women and little kids as shields I guess, kidnap and behead innocent bystanders, write in their writings that we all are infidels and immoral and indecent and deserving of death and they say they will see that we get what we deserve. That's why they hijacked passenger liners filled with innocent men, women, and children and crashed them into two buildings filled with innocent men, women, and children.

For the life of me I can't understand those who seem to have more sympathy and understanding for terrorists than they have for those who are attempting to enforce the law and keep them from murdering innocent men, women, and children.
 

cnredd

Major General Big Lug
DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 5, 2005
Messages
8,682
Reaction score
262
Location
Philadelphia,PA
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Conservative
26 X World Champs said:
NO! It was a racial slur, not an attempt at humor at all. To condone comments like that is to condone any "joke" made at the expense of nationalities or races. Anyone who accepts slurs as jokes is equally guilty of using this slur to demean.

You know?

It was both!:2wave:
 

BWG

DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 29, 2005
Messages
4,373
Reaction score
1,602
Location
South Coast
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
26 X World Champs said:
NO! It was a racial slur, not an attempt at humor at all. To condone comments like that is to condone any "joke" made at the expense of nationalities or races. Anyone who accepts slurs as jokes is equally guilty of using this slur to demean.

You know?

Don't you know..IYARIOK (If Your A Republican It's O K)


The people in the military aren't just mindless robots, they can think freely on their own. They can make the distinction between being against the war and FOR the troops. These are some comments from military in the Pensacola area (they have a naval air station there).



"I have run into people who don't support the president's views on Iraq or our objectives, but I haven't run into a single person who said (he or she) doesn't support the troops," said Jason Crawford, a Purple Heart recipient who was shot in the face by opposition forces in December 2003 while in Iraq. "I think our society learned from Vietnam that it's not the men and women who sacrifice their lives and signed on the dotted lines who make up the plans and objectives. I think pretty much everyone supports the troops."

While many troops wish more Americans would support the war effort, some said it's heartening to know the folks back home wish them nothing but the best. "They might not agree with (the war)," said Marine Corps Sgt. Ryan Bentele, 29, who returned from Iraq in May. "But they show us respect."

It's Vietnam veterans who are most appreciative, he said. "They thank us the most," he said. "They had a hard time coming back and are truly appreciative of the job we're doing."

. . . Army Reserves Lt. Col. Alice Bell, 46, who spent 10 months in Kuwait in support of the Iraq invasion, said she has heard nothing but praise since returning home. "It's not like in Vietnam, when they spat on troops coming back," she said. "Some people don't agree with the mission itself. But even if they're against the war effort, they're for the troops. They realize we're doing what we have to do, what we've been ordered to do, whether we agree with it or not."

Army National Guard Sgt. Shelton Johnson spent nearly a year in Iraq in 2003 and 2004. When he's in uniform, people often stop to offer him a verbal salute, he said. "In Wal-Mart, customers come over and say 'Thank you,' " said Johnson, manager at the Kentucky Fried Chicken in Milton. "Most people are just real appreciative toward the soldiers."

Crawford, who now works for a health-care company, said he's not hurt by anti-war protests. On the contrary, he feels protests are a vital part of American democracy. "As long as they're not defiant against the troops or the president, then I think it's actually healthy for our society and government," he


www.pensacolanewsjournal.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20050821/NEWS01/508210332/1006
 

vergiss

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 31, 2005
Messages
2,356
Reaction score
1
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Slightly Liberal
AlbqOwl said:
That's why they use women and little kids as shields I guess, kidnap and behead innocent bystanders, write in their writings that we all are infidels and immoral and indecent and deserving of death and they say they will see that we get what we deserve. That's why they hijacked passenger liners filled with innocent men, women, and children and crashed them into two buildings filled with innocent men, women, and children.

For the life of me I can't understand those who seem to have more sympathy and understanding for terrorists than they have for those who are attempting to enforce the law and keep them from murdering innocent men, women, and children.

Oh? Who, exactly, sympathises with the terrorists?

I protested against the Iraq war. However, I hate terrorists. Why wouldn't I? They're mass murdering psychopaths who'd think nothing of disembowling me. The reason I protested was because Iraq was entirely the wrong way to go about stopping terrorism in the Middle East.

To accuse those who are against the war of sympathising with terrorists is bloody stupid, on so many levels... :roll:
 

AlbqOwl

DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 12, 2005
Messages
23,578
Reaction score
12,384
Location
New Mexico
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Independent
26 X World Champs said:
NO! It was a racial slur, not an attempt at humor at all. To condone comments like that is to condone any "joke" made at the expense of nationalities or races. Anyone who accepts slurs as jokes is equally guilty of using this slur to demean.

You know?

Racial slur? It was aimed at terrorists and those who willlingly or inadvertently sympathise with, aid and abet terrorists. I'm sorry, but I am just not politically correct enough to think terrorists are deserving of any consideration of their sensibilities.

I am not saying that Cindy Sheehan is a terrorist. But in my view, what she has been doing is criticizing our side in a way that gives encouragement and a morale boost to the terrorists and aids them in recruitment. I think that is wrong. I will always believe that is wrong.

Originally posted by Vergiss: Oh? Who, exactly, sympathises with the terrorists?

See the above quote. Some worry about how the terrorists feel if we criticize them or ridicule them. In my opinion, that is overtly or inadvertently sympathizing with terrorists.
 

vergiss

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 31, 2005
Messages
2,356
Reaction score
1
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Slightly Liberal
AlbqOwl said:
See the above quote. Some worry about how the terrorists feel if we criticize them or ridicule them. In my opinion, that is overtly or inadvertently sympathizing with terrorists.

Who is "some"? 26 X World Champs? He was concerned about racial slurs - ie, against Arabs generally, not terrorists specifically. Last I checked, terrorists aren't a race.
 

AlbqOwl

DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 12, 2005
Messages
23,578
Reaction score
12,384
Location
New Mexico
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Independent
vergiss said:
Who is "some"? 26 X World Champs? He was concerned about racial slurs - ie, against Arabs generally, not terrorists specifically. Last I checked, terrorists aren't a race.

So then, a slur against terrorists would not be a slur against a race. The joke was aimed at terrorists, not Arabs. That the terrorists all have Arab names was why that particular pseudonym was used. If they had been Italian or Irish or Puerto Rican, a different pseudonym would have been used.

It doesn't strike you as odd that a harmless joke seems to evoke more anger than what terrorists do? Where do you see condemnation of the terrorists from the Left anywhere near on a par or with the same frequency as you see condemnation of the President, of military guards at Abu Ghraib, or Donald Rumsfield or criticism of the purpose of the mission itself? Those who joked with the al-Sheehan line have been criticized in this forum far more than the terrorists have been criticized.

And you think the terrorists don't feel exhonerated when they see that? You think they aren't cheering on all that public, hateful rhetoric and expect it to further weaken the will of the American people and let them win? It worked before. They have no reason to think we've learned anything from our history.
 

vergiss

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 31, 2005
Messages
2,356
Reaction score
1
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Slightly Liberal
Richard Reid didn't have an Arab name.

Uh... yeah. Cnredd's joke has provoked a bigger public reaction than 9/11 did. Definitely.

Terrorists and terrorism are beyond evil. That goes without saying. You shouldn't have to say "Bin Laden is a bastard!" every 20 seconds without people jumping down your throat about how you don't condemn them enough. Is there some competition to prove who hates them the most, or something? :roll: The terrorists will never defeat us. I don't know why people are acting as if they can.
 
Top Bottom