• 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.

Why Terrorist are angry with America!

Status
Not open for further replies.
Surenderer, so do you agree that most muslims would rather like the US if we could just give them a reason too? Like stop the aggression. And cancel Al Hurrah while were at it. Your words are well said and certainly carry more weight than mine on this matter.

Last ad, I found Al Jazeerah to be far more objective and a news organization that embraces integrity. As opposed to the bi-polar opposite:Fox News.
 
Last edited:
Billo_Really said:
The prospect of Chaney makes me ill. But we can impeach both of them. Which then, per our Constitution, we now have (correct me if I'm wrong) President Rice.


(In Case of the Removal of the President from Office, or of his Death, Resignation, or Inability to discharge the Powers and Duties of the said Office, the same shall devolve on the Vice President, and the Congress may by Law provide for the Case of Removal, Death, Resignation or Inability, both of the President and Vice President, declaring what Officer shall then act as President, and such Officer shall act accordingly, until the Disability be removed, or a President shall be elected.) (This clause in parentheses has been modified by Amendments XX and XXV.)

I have been reading Amendments 20 and 25, and if I'm interpreting correctly, doesn't Congress, in the event the Vice President cannot assume the duties of President, get to select a Cabinet official to act as President until special elections can be held for the people to elect a new Pres?
 
Billo_Really said:
Surenderer, so do you agree that most muslims would rather like the US if we could just give them a reason too? Like stop the aggression. And cancel Al Hurrah while were at it. Your words are well said and certainly carry more weight than mine on this matter.

Last ad, I found Al Jazeerah to be far more objective and a news organization that embraces integrity. As opposed to the bi-polar opposite:Fox News.






Well I think that most Muslims would definitely not want war with anybody......especially a country that is the most powerful in history.I think that if the U.S. pulled out of Saudi Arabia (which they were only suppose to be there until the threat of Saddam invading them left) started condemning Israel for the acts that they would condemn any other M.E. country with (they have broken more U.N. violations than any other country) and stopped with it's hypocritical policy's then most Muslims would like America or at worse be at least indifferent. See I have been brought up to believe that in Islam violence is a thing of self defense:

[22.39] Permission (to fight) is given to those upon whom war is made because they are oppressed, and most surely Allah is well able to assist them;


Now even though I say this I know that all Muslim fighting hasn't been in self-defense but those situations aren't in accordance with what Islam teaches...Remember Muhammad Ali( the boxer) and why he didn't go to Vietnam? it wasn't a war of self defense but a War of aggression which is against Islamic principles...thats what true Islam is suppose to be about


peace upon you
 
The US is will bend over backwards rather than ****-off the Saudi's. They even have Secret Service protection at their embassy in Washington. Figure that one out.

Let me ask you a question. I heard that one of the highest tenants of muslim law is to allow guests and strangers into your home. Is this true? If it is, how can anyone think toward muslims if this is one of the rules they live by. Also, someone told me that terrorists are not muslims. That it is against muslim law to kill.

As far as Ali, Cassius Clay was a much better fighter!
 
Last edited:
Billo_Really said:
The US is will bend over backwards rather than ****-off the Saudi's. They even have Secret Service protection at their embassy in Washington. Figure that one out.

Let me ask you a question. I heard that one of the highest tenants of muslim law is to allow guests and strangers into your home. Is this true? If it is, how can anyone think toward muslims if this is one of the rules they live by. Also, someone told me that terrorists are not muslims. That it is against muslim law to kill.

As far as Ali, Cassius Clay was a much better fighter!





Well he was only Cassius until the 1st Liston fight ;) anyway it is true that in Islam it is customary to treat Guests as family members because we are Ambassadors of our religion so we should always be courteous. As far a killing in Islam..... Murder is always wrong but Capital Punishment is different:

"...if any one slew a person - unless it be for murder or for spreading mischief in the land(treason) - it would be as if he slew the whole people: and if any one saved a life, it would be as if he saved the life of the whole people...(Noble Quran 5:32)"


I find it hard to believe that someone can be a Muslim and kill themselves or innocent people when the Koran speaks out against these acts....the Koran is very specific about it's rules for engagement......and anything outside of what it says outside of the Koran is unislamic



peace upon you
 
Billo_Really said:
Read Aleems post. Then read again. And again. And again. Until you realize that the reason for 9/11 was directly proportional to American arrogance and its quest for Empire. We are not the great country we once were if we condone torture, detainment without being charged of a crime, and this illegal phoney war on terror.
You cannot have a war against an ideology. There is no tangible way to have closure. This is all BS. We are in Iraq to proliferate Corporatism. And we are heading for our own Nuremburg. Check out the link below and see what you don't see in the Pro-Bush media over at Fox News.

http://www.worldtribunal.org/main/?b=7

Best way to prevent 9/11 is to impeach Bush, have Congress remove him from office and him over to an International Court to be charged as a war criminal for Crimes against Humanity.
Were so glad you live in your own dream world. But this should wake you up! :shoot :eek:

Foreign Terrorist Organizations

17 November
Abu Nidal Organization (ANO)
Abu Sayyaf Group (ASG)
Al-Aqsa Martyrs Brigade
Ansar al-Islam (AI)
Armed Islamic Group (GIA)
Asbat al-Ansar
Aum Shinrikyo (Aum)
Basque Fatherland and Liberty (ETA)
Communist Party of Philippines/New People’s Army (CPP/NPA)
Continuity Irish Republican Army (CIRA)
Gama’a al-Islamiyya (IG)
HAMAS
Harakat ul-Mujahidin (HUM)
Hizballah
Islamic Movement of Uzbekistan (IMU)
Jaish-e-Mohammed (JEM)
Jemaah Islamiya Organization (JI)
Al-Jihad (AJ)
Kahane Chai (Kach)
Kongra-Gel (KGK)
Lashkar e-Tayyiba (LT)
Lashkar i Jhangvi (LJ)
Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE)
Libyan Islamic Fighting Group (LIFG)
Mujahedin-e Khalq Organization (MEK)
National Liberation Army (ELN)
Palestine Liberation Front (PLF)
Palestinian Islamic Jihad (PIJ)
Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine (PFLP)
Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine-General Command (PFLP-GC)
Al-Qa’ida
Real IRA (RIRA)
Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia (FARC)
Revolutionary Nuclei (RN)
Revolutionary People’s Liberation Party/Front (DHKP/C)
Salafist Group for Call and Combat (GSPC)
Shining Path (SL)
Tanzim Qa’idat al-Jihad fi Bilad al-Rafidayn (QJBR)
United Self-Defense Forces of Colombia (AUC)
Source
 
Last edited:
WTF? You should just do yourself and everyone else a favor and find a new flag to hate.
I don't hate the flag. Just cowards who are too afraid to learn and let others do the thinking for them. And why is it hating the flag if you object to the torture of children at Abu Ghraib? Also, what does it say about you, turning your head, and pretending you just don't see it?

Are you defending our right to do this...


Sunday Herald - 01 August 2004
Iraq's Child Prisoners
A Sunday Herald investigation has discovered that coalition forces are holding more than 100 children in jails such as Abu Ghraib. Witnesses claim that the detainees – some as young as 10 – are also being subjected to rape and torture
By Neil Mackay

It was early last October that Kasim Mehaddi Hilas says he witnessed the rape of a boy prisoner aged about 15 in the notorious Abu Ghraib prison in Iraq. “The kid was hurting very bad and they covered all the doors with sheets,” he said in a statement given to investigators probing prisoner abuse in Abu Ghraib. “Then, when I heard the screaming I climbed the door … and I saw [the soldier’s name is deleted] who was wearing a military uniform.” Hilas, who was himself threatened with being sexually assaulted in Abu Graib, then describes in horrific detail how the soldier raped “the little kid”.
In another witness statement, passed to the Sunday Herald, former prisoner Thaar Salman Dawod said: “[I saw] two boys naked and they were cuffed together face to face and [a US soldier] was beating them and a group of guards were watching and taking pictures and there was three female soldiers laughing at the prisoners. The prisoners, two of them, were young.”

It’s not certain exactly how many children are being held by coalition forces in Iraq, but a Sunday Herald investigation suggests there are up to 107. Their names are not known, nor is where they are being kept, how long they will be held or what has happened to them during their detention.

Proof of the widespread arrest and detention of children in Iraq by US and UK forces is contained in an internal Unicef report written in June. The report has – surprisingly – not been made public. A key section on child protection, headed “Children in Conflict with the Law or with Coalition Forces”, reads: “In July and August 2003, several meetings were conducted with CPA (Coalition Provisional Authority) … and Ministry of Justice to address issues related to juvenile justice and the situation of children detained by the coalition forces … Unicef is working through a variety of channels to try and learn more about conditions for children who are imprisoned or detained, and to ensure that their rights are respected.”

The report also states: “A detention centre for children was established in Baghdad, where according to ICRC (International Committee of the Red Cross) a significant number of children were detained. Unicef was informed that the coalition forces were planning to transfer all children in adult facilities to this ‘specialised’ child detention centre. In July 2003, Unicef requested a visit to the centre but access was denied. Poor security in the area of the detention centre has prevented visits by independent observers like the ICRC since last December.

“The perceived unjust detention of Iraqi males, including youths, for suspected activities against the occupying forces has become one of the leading causes for the mounting frustration among Iraqi youths and the potential for radicalisation of this population group.”

Journalists in Germany have also been investigating the detention and abuse of children in Iraq. One reporter, Thomas Reutter of the TV programme Report Mainz, interviewed a US army sergeant called Samuel Provance, who is banned from speaking about his six months stationed in Abu Ghraib but told Reutter of how one 16-year-old Iraqi boy was arrested.

“He was terribly afraid,” Provance said. “He had the skinniest arms I’ve ever seen. He was trembling all over. His wrists were so thin we couldn’t even put handcuffs on him. Right when I saw him for the first time, and took him for interrogation, I felt sorry for him.

“The interrogation specialists poured water over him and put him into a car. Then they drove with him through the night, and at that time it was very, very cold. Then they smeared him with mud and showed him to his father, who was also in custody. They had tried out other interrogation methods on him, but he wasn’t to be brought to talk. The interrogation specialists told me, after the father had seen his son in this state, his heart broke. He wept and promised to tell them everything they wanted to know.”

An Iraqi TV reporter Suhaib Badr-Addin al-Baz saw the Abu Ghraib children’s wing when he was arrested by Americans while making a documentary. He spent 74 days in Abu Ghraib.

“I saw a camp for children there,” he said. “Boys, under the age of puberty. There were certainly hundreds of children in this camp.” Al-Baz said he heard a 12-year-old girl crying. Her brother was also held in the jail. One night guards came into her cell. “She was beaten,” said al-Baz. “I heard her call out, ‘They have undressed me. They have poured water over me.’”

He says he heard her cries and whimpering daily – this, in turn, caused other prisoners to cry as they listened to her. Al-Baz also told of an ill 15-year-old boy who was soaked repeatedly with hoses until he collapsed. Guards then brought in the child’s father with a hood over his head. The boy collapsed again.

Between January and May this year the Red Cross registered a total of 107 juveniles in detention during 19 visits to six coalition prisons. The aid organisation’s Rana Sidani said they had no complete information about the ages of those detained, or how they had been treated. The deteriorating security situation has prevented the Red Cross visiting all detention centres.

Amnesty International is outraged by the detention of children. It is aware of “numerous human rights violations against Iraqi juveniles, including detentions, torture and ill-treatment, and killings”. Amnesty has interviewed former detainees who say they’ve seen boys as young as 10 in Abu Ghraib.

Alistair Hodgett, media director of Amnesty International USA, said the coalition forces needed to be “transparent” about their policy of child detentions, adding: “Secrecy is one thing that rings alarm bells.” Amnesty was given brief access to one jail in Mosul, he said, but has been repeatedly turned away from all others. He pointed out that even countries “which don’t have good records”, such as Libya, gave Amnesty access to prisons. “Denying access just fuels the rumour mill,” he said.

High-placed officials in the Pentagon and Centcom told the Sunday Herald that children as young as 14 were being held by US forces. “We do have juveniles detained,” a source said. “They have been detained as they are deemed to be a threat or because they have acted against the coalition or Iraqis.”

Officially, the Pentagon says it is holding “around 60 juvenile detainees primarily aged 16 and 17”, although when it was pointed out that the Red Cross estimate is substantially higher, a source admitted “numbers may have gone up, we might have detained more kids”.

The Norwegian government, which is part of the “coalition of the willing”, has already said it will tell the US that the alleged torture of children is intolerable. Odd Jostein Sæter, parliamentary secretary at the Norwegian prime minister’s office, said: “Such assaults are unacceptable. It is against international laws and it is also unacceptable from a moral point of view. This is why we react strongly … We are addressing this in a very severe and direct way and present concrete demands. This is damaging the struggle for democracy and human rights in Iraq.”

In Denmark, which is also in the coalition, Save the Children called on its government to tell the occupying forces to order the immediate release of child detainees. Neals Hurdal, head of the Danish Save the Children, said the y had heard rumours of children in Basra being maltreated in custody since May.

Human Rights Watch (HRW) said it was “extremely disturbed” that the coalition was holding children for long periods in jails notorious for torture. HRW also criticised the policy of categorising children as “security detainees”, saying this did not give carte blanche for them to be held indefinitely. HRW said if there was evidence the children had committed crimes then they should be tried in Iraqi courts, otherwise they should be returned to their families.

Unicef is “profoundly disturbed” by reports of children being abused in coalition jails. Alexandra Yuster, Unicef’s senior adviser on child detention, said that under international law children should be detained only as a last resort and only then for the shortest possible time.

They should have access to lawyers and their families, be kept safe, healthy, educated, well-fed and not be subjected to any form of mental or physical punishment, she added. Unicef is now “desperately” trying to get more information on the fate of the children currently detained in coalition jails.
 
Last edited:
Billo_Really said:
I don't hate the flag. Just cowards who are too afraid to learn and let others do the thinking for them. And why is it hating the flag if you object to the torture of children at Abu Ghraib? Also, what does it say about you, turning your head, and pretending you just don't see it?

Are you defending our right to do this...


Sunday Herald - 01 August 2004
Iraq's Child Prisoners
A Sunday Herald investigation has discovered that coalition forces are holding more than 100 children in jails such as Abu Ghraib. Witnesses claim that the detainees – some as young as 10 – are also being subjected to rape and torture
By Neil Mackay

It was early last October that Kasim Mehaddi Hilas says he witnessed the rape of a boy prisoner aged about 15 in the notorious Abu Ghraib prison in Iraq. “The kid was hurting very bad and they covered all the doors with sheets,” he said in a statement given to investigators probing prisoner abuse in Abu Ghraib. “Then, when I heard the screaming I climbed the door … and I saw [the soldier’s name is deleted] who was wearing a military uniform.” Hilas, who was himself threatened with being sexually assaulted in Abu Graib, then describes in horrific detail how the soldier raped “the little kid”.
In another witness statement, passed to the Sunday Herald, former prisoner Thaar Salman Dawod said: “[I saw] two boys naked and they were cuffed together face to face and [a US soldier] was beating them and a group of guards were watching and taking pictures and there was three female soldiers laughing at the prisoners. The prisoners, two of them, were young.”

It’s not certain exactly how many children are being held by coalition forces in Iraq, but a Sunday Herald investigation suggests there are up to 107. Their names are not known, nor is where they are being kept, how long they will be held or what has happened to them during their detention.

Proof of the widespread arrest and detention of children in Iraq by US and UK forces is contained in an internal Unicef report written in June. The report has – surprisingly – not been made public. A key section on child protection, headed “Children in Conflict with the Law or with Coalition Forces”, reads: “In July and August 2003, several meetings were conducted with CPA (Coalition Provisional Authority) … and Ministry of Justice to address issues related to juvenile justice and the situation of children detained by the coalition forces … Unicef is working through a variety of channels to try and learn more about conditions for children who are imprisoned or detained, and to ensure that their rights are respected.”

The report also states: “A detention centre for children was established in Baghdad, where according to ICRC (International Committee of the Red Cross) a significant number of children were detained. Unicef was informed that the coalition forces were planning to transfer all children in adult facilities to this ‘specialised’ child detention centre. In July 2003, Unicef requested a visit to the centre but access was denied. Poor security in the area of the detention centre has prevented visits by independent observers like the ICRC since last December.

“The perceived unjust detention of Iraqi males, including youths, for suspected activities against the occupying forces has become one of the leading causes for the mounting frustration among Iraqi youths and the potential for radicalisation of this population group.”

Journalists in Germany have also been investigating the detention and abuse of children in Iraq. One reporter, Thomas Reutter of the TV programme Report Mainz, interviewed a US army sergeant called Samuel Provance, who is banned from speaking about his six months stationed in Abu Ghraib but told Reutter of how one 16-year-old Iraqi boy was arrested.

“He was terribly afraid,” Provance said. “He had the skinniest arms I’ve ever seen. He was trembling all over. His wrists were so thin we couldn’t even put handcuffs on him. Right when I saw him for the first time, and took him for interrogation, I felt sorry for him.

“The interrogation specialists poured water over him and put him into a car. Then they drove with him through the night, and at that time it was very, very cold. Then they smeared him with mud and showed him to his father, who was also in custody. They had tried out other interrogation methods on him, but he wasn’t to be brought to talk. The interrogation specialists told me, after the father had seen his son in this state, his heart broke. He wept and promised to tell them everything they wanted to know.”

An Iraqi TV reporter Suhaib Badr-Addin al-Baz saw the Abu Ghraib children’s wing when he was arrested by Americans while making a documentary. He spent 74 days in Abu Ghraib.

“I saw a camp for children there,” he said. “Boys, under the age of puberty. There were certainly hundreds of children in this camp.” Al-Baz said he heard a 12-year-old girl crying. Her brother was also held in the jail. One night guards came into her cell. “She was beaten,” said al-Baz. “I heard her call out, ‘They have undressed me. They have poured water over me.’”

He says he heard her cries and whimpering daily – this, in turn, caused other prisoners to cry as they listened to her. Al-Baz also told of an ill 15-year-old boy who was soaked repeatedly with hoses until he collapsed. Guards then brought in the child’s father with a hood over his head. The boy collapsed again.

Between January and May this year the Red Cross registered a total of 107 juveniles in detention during 19 visits to six coalition prisons. The aid organisation’s Rana Sidani said they had no complete information about the ages of those detained, or how they had been treated. The deteriorating security situation has prevented the Red Cross visiting all detention centres.

Amnesty International is outraged by the detention of children. It is aware of “numerous human rights violations against Iraqi juveniles, including detentions, torture and ill-treatment, and killings”. Amnesty has interviewed former detainees who say they’ve seen boys as young as 10 in Abu Ghraib.

Alistair Hodgett, media director of Amnesty International USA, said the coalition forces needed to be “transparent” about their policy of child detentions, adding: “Secrecy is one thing that rings alarm bells.” Amnesty was given brief access to one jail in Mosul, he said, but has been repeatedly turned away from all others. He pointed out that even countries “which don’t have good records”, such as Libya, gave Amnesty access to prisons. “Denying access just fuels the rumour mill,” he said.

High-placed officials in the Pentagon and Centcom told the Sunday Herald that children as young as 14 were being held by US forces. “We do have juveniles detained,” a source said. “They have been detained as they are deemed to be a threat or because they have acted against the coalition or Iraqis.”

Officially, the Pentagon says it is holding “around 60 juvenile detainees primarily aged 16 and 17”, although when it was pointed out that the Red Cross estimate is substantially higher, a source admitted “numbers may have gone up, we might have detained more kids”.

The Norwegian government, which is part of the “coalition of the willing”, has already said it will tell the US that the alleged torture of children is intolerable. Odd Jostein Sæter, parliamentary secretary at the Norwegian prime minister’s office, said: “Such assaults are unacceptable. It is against international laws and it is also unacceptable from a moral point of view. This is why we react strongly … We are addressing this in a very severe and direct way and present concrete demands. This is damaging the struggle for democracy and human rights in Iraq.”

In Denmark, which is also in the coalition, Save the Children called on its government to tell the occupying forces to order the immediate release of child detainees. Neals Hurdal, head of the Danish Save the Children, said the y had heard rumours of children in Basra being maltreated in custody since May.

Human Rights Watch (HRW) said it was “extremely disturbed” that the coalition was holding children for long periods in jails notorious for torture. HRW also criticised the policy of categorising children as “security detainees”, saying this did not give carte blanche for them to be held indefinitely. HRW said if there was evidence the children had committed crimes then they should be tried in Iraqi courts, otherwise they should be returned to their families.

Unicef is “profoundly disturbed” by reports of children being abused in coalition jails. Alexandra Yuster, Unicef’s senior adviser on child detention, said that under international law children should be detained only as a last resort and only then for the shortest possible time.

They should have access to lawyers and their families, be kept safe, healthy, educated, well-fed and not be subjected to any form of mental or physical punishment, she added. Unicef is now “desperately” trying to get more information on the fate of the children currently detained in coalition jails.

Take your own advice and stop believing everything you read.
A Sunday Herald investigation
That says it all! Again the biased media making stories similar to what you get on the big screen in Hollywood. I seriously question the authenticity of your source and the fact that Amnesty International is even mentioned sends this in the direction of hard left propaganda. If this story had a shred of truth to it the CBS Dan Blather biased media would have blown it up!
Of course I don't support any abuse of children but if these kids are detained under the suspicion that they may be involved in terrorist activities I see nothing wrong with holding them. Kids can strap bombs to themselves and blow up our soldiers and other Iraqi's as easily as adults can.
 
The prospect of Chaney makes me ill. But we can impeach both of them. Which then, per our Constitution, we now have (correct me if I'm wrong) President Rice
This was my own quote. I'm correcting it because I was wrong. No cabinet member can assume the Presidency. It has to be an elected official, not an appointed one. My bad!
 
Last edited:
That says it all! Again the biased media making stories similar to what you get on the big screen in Hollywood. I seriously question the authenticity of your source and the fact that Amnesty International is even mentioned sends this in the direction of hard left propaganda. If this story had a shred of truth to it the CBS Dan Blather biased media would have blown it up!
Of course I don't support any abuse of children but if these kids are detained under the suspicion that they may be involved in terrorist activities I see nothing wrong with holding them. Kids can strap bombs to themselves and blow up our soldiers and other Iraqi's as easily as adults can.
This is not the only source that is claiming this. Also, if this wasn't true, then why won't US military officials allow the Red Cross in to see their condition. They won't allow any impartial monitoring at all. What are they hiding? What gets me is how you can quote Jesus, and then rationalize the torture of children so as a matter of factly. It's just convenient for you to think they deserve it. It is a little harder to walk with Jesus and find out the truth for yourself.

"How many times can a man turn his head pretending he just doesn't see"-Bob Dylan.

Whether it is your truth or my truth, you are not going to find any truth until you look. Implying that if it wasn't on CBS then it can't be true is a major cop-out. And Rather is not blathering anywhere. Yet you still use him to qualify the story.
 
Last edited:
The religious extremists who hate America hate everyone who do not believe in their beliefs. We have seen proof of this today in London and in several other countries. Terrorists are not just angry with America, they are angry at anyone who don't live in a country where extreme Islam controls the country. It doesn't matter if you are anti-war Bin Laden and other extremists still consider you an infidel and they still want you dead.
 
Do you really believe that people resort to terrorism and murder based religion? You don't believe that perhaps there are other factors? None at all?
 
LaMidRighter said:
There were different reasons that people re-elected President Bush, for instance, I saw nothing that Kerry could do that would actually bring about good for the country and felt that all of the progress we've made to re-establish a consumer driven market could be destroyed by one signiture on the wrong economic bill, Kerry was very weak on the economic level IMHO and I also believe he played the monetary classes against each other to further his agenda. I also didn't trust his take on the war, but that was secondary.


Could it be, and this is just my theory on it, that people did not want to elect a new president in the midst of war, the way they did during Vietnam? Many people believe that was part of the reason why it was a disaster to our troops, after they arrived in 1961... we had 3 Presidential changes between '61 and '72.

I'm not saying it is the total reason, but it could explain a good portion of it, especially for Americans who remember that time.
 
Billo_Really said:
This is not the only source that is claiming this. Also, if this wasn't true, then why won't US military officials allow the Red Cross in to see their condition. They won't allow any impartial monitoring at all. What are they hiding? What gets me is how you can quote Jesus, and then rationalize the torture of children so as a matter of factly. It's just convenient for you to think they deserve it. It is a little harder to walk with Jesus and find out the truth for yourself.

"How many times can a man turn his head pretending he just doesn't see"-Bob Dylan.

Whether it is your truth or my truth, you are not going to find any truth until you look. Implying that if it wasn't on CBS then it can't be true is a major cop-out. And Rather is not blathering anywhere. Yet you still use him to qualify the story.
Oh stop with the conspiracy theories already... It is none of the Red Cross's business! Our Armed Forces do not need babysitters and terrorists need medical care like fish need bicycles! And don't put words in my mouth or twist what I said. I'll quote myself since you are too stupid to do it properly
Of course I don't support any abuse of children but if these kids are detained under the suspicion that they may be involved in terrorist activities I see nothing wrong with holding them.
Don't attack my faith either, I never said I felt or believed any kids deserve to be tortured or rapped, get your ***** straight.
My point is that such an awful truth, were it true would be on every channel spewing from every left wing reporters mouth, not buried in some crumby paper article investigated by the author.
 
Do you really believe that people resort to terrorism and murder based religion? You don't believe that perhaps there are other factors? None at all?

To Gandhi>Bush: Yea thats about it. They are driven by their religion to kill and hate, that is the main reason.
 
Messerschmitt said:
To Gandhi>Bush: Yea thats about it. They are driven by their religion to kill and hate, that is the main reason.

I think that every muslim knows where his religion stands on senseless killing. It is a select few who twist words and use different parts as propaganda that spew their hatred and murderous rhetoric. I believe there are certain conditions and reasons that one would be led to swallow such beliefs. I believe there is a way to save such a man and there is a way to prevent this from happening.

If you refuse to fall into the trap, then the ones spreading their disgusting message will fall and be looked at as the crazies, kind of like how christians(or those that I know) look at Jerry Falwell.
 
Gandhi>Bush said:
I think that every muslim knows where his religion stands on senseless killing. It is a select few who twist words and use different parts as propaganda that spew their hatred and murderous rhetoric. I believe there are certain conditions and reasons that one would be led to swallow such beliefs. I believe there is a way to save such a man and there is a way to prevent this from happening.

If you refuse to fall into the trap, then the ones spreading their disgusting message will fall and be looked at as the crazies, kind of like how christians(or those that I know) look at Jerry Falwell.
They have been killing each other in the Middle East in the name of Allah for over 2000 years. Many wars and deaths are fought and caused in the name of religion and the Christians are not exempt from this either. The point is that religion is the motive with the terrorists who have twisted a otherwise peaceful way of life.
 
Bluestateredneck said:
They have been killing each other in the Middle East in the name of Allah for over 2000 years. Many wars and deaths are fought and caused in the name of religion and the Christians are not exempt from this either. The point is that religion is the motive with the terrorists who have twisted a otherwise peaceful way of life.

I believe that Muslims have moved away from their past, just as much as Christians have. Christians have their share of nuts, though in Muslim conmmunities it is more prevalent, it begs the question: Why? That's easy. MOST(not all) Christians live in relatively good and liveable if not prosperous conditions(especially in comparison to Muslims of the Middle East). Christians are educated. Muslims are educated, but generally not very well in the middle east. Any uneducated man forced into an unliveable situation will try to beat his way out of it. There are only few amount of Christians that truly preach hate: the KKK and Shamgar. I believe it is the same in a Muslim society except that in most Muslims societies, are more susceptible to buying into the propaganda because, to be brief, their life sucks. It is a great thing to want to change this, but we cannot do it with violence because it will only spread.
 
debate_junkie said:
Could it be, and this is just my theory on it, that people did not want to elect a new president in the midst of war, the way they did during Vietnam? Many people believe that was part of the reason why it was a disaster to our troops, after they arrived in 1961... we had 3 Presidential changes between '61 and '72.

I'm not saying it is the total reason, but it could explain a good portion of it, especially for Americans who remember that time.
With all due respect, that does not make sense? Kennedy was killed, Johnson didn't run for reelection and Nixon was a crook (had to throw that in).

My point is that at no point could we have reelected a president during Vietnam until 1972 so I do not really see how your theory stands up?
 
In my eyes America was left with the propostion of voting for the lesser of 2 evils. Kerry would not have pulled out of Iraq so I don't see why extreme leftists need to compare Bush to Hitler or a nazi when Kerry would have been doing the same damn thing. And I seriously doubt that most democrats would be genuinely honest enough and throw out the same criticism to Kerry if the situation was in fact reversed.

I would really love to see what Rolling Stone, Moveon.org, etc. would have to say about America's handling of the war with Kerry in charge. Do you think they would really have a weekly polemic denouning Kerry and his administration? Somehow I doubt it.

While were at it, how many liberals and democrats had a problem with Clinton handing out no bid contracts to Haliburton in the Balkins? Hell, Michael Moore didn't even bring that up in his so called "documentary" now did he?

Just keeping it real for all the idealogues out there.
 
suicide bombers are desperate people with no where else to go?

http://www.globalsecurity.org/security/library/news/2003/05/sec-030508-39196c6e.htm

http://www.umich.edu/~iinet/iisite/media/10-08-04-WallStreetJournal-suicidebombers.htm

research says otherwise. Your view of the world is simplistic.

wit regards to the gentleman that states that Islam is peaceful and wars are only for self defence, some of the most famous battles were offensive wars. These occurred in the time of the Prophet SAW. Lands were conquered by the muslims and Islam was implemented. Just as the times now whereby Iraq has been captured by the coalition forces and Capitalism is being implemented over the muslims.
 
Oh stop with the conspiracy ...[it's atrocities]... theories already
It is none of the Red Cross's business!
That's by design.
Our Armed Forces do not need babysitters and terrorists need medical care like fish need bicycles!
[....and then he said....]
Don't attack my faith either,...
You can't attack something someone does not have!
I never said I felt or believed any kids deserve to be tortured...
You don't have too. Your silence on this matter speaks volumes!
My point is that such an awful truth, were it true would be on every channel spewing from every left wing reporters mouth, not buried in some crumby paper article investigated by the author.
Do you feel the comment below is from a "...crumby..." source?

Veterans For Peace believes that the recent allegations of abuse of Iraqi prisoners at Abu Ghraib Prison, and other places, by U.S. military personnel should not come as a surprise to anyone who has been to war.
In his investigation of the 800th Military Police Brigade, Maj. Gen. Antonio M. Taguba found: “… numerous incidents of sadistic, blatant, and wanton criminal abuses were inflicted on several detainees. This systemic and illegal abuse of detainees was intentionally perpetrated by several members of the military police guard force”.


And finally, back by special request, the aforementioned "...crumby..." source.
A Sunday Herald investigation has discovered that coalition forces are holding more than 100 children in jails such as Abu Ghraib. Witnesses claim that the detainees – some as young as 10 – are also being subjected to rape and torture

I'd like to thank the Academy....
 
Last edited:
galenrox said:
And it certainly doesn't help us much that after 9/11 people were pulling arabs out of their cars and beating them. Or us torturing muslims and ******* on them and their qu'rans. Or the fact that quite a few of us refer to arabs as "sand niggers". So yeah, we can blame them, but if we don't look at what we're doing to make us a target, then nothing will change.


You are are true liberal asswipe. Let's all try to understand why that hate us so much, give me a break. I just have to shake my head with ****-wads like you.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom