Remembering 9/11 and the REAL ENEMY

Solitary said:
What?? YOU are talking about taking away one of the most fundamental rights bestowed on us by our Constitution, and you say that I hate america??


Talk about twisting the facts.
Click to expand...

No--you fucking liberials, like Thor said--are taking away our right to protect ourself--both militarially and economically.

You do hate America. Half of this population was taught to hate America--I just call it like it is.

What do you think of the dem liberials saying McCain is over playing his military exp--like commie Jim Carter?
 
Last edited:
Thor said:
Liberalism deserves most of the credit for the 9/11 attacks. After all, it was the politically correct bullshit of the left which permitted those fuckers to enter the country undetected. Liberals are THE ENEMY -- of that I am thoroughly convinced.
Click to expand...

You are a fool.
 
theMAJORITY said:
Make sure you read that guy his rights---that guy over there--the one with the bloody blade, and a head in his other hand. He has rights to ya know? tears for killers.
Click to expand...

No thanks, I'll put a .45 between his eyes. I am not prtecting the terrorists.

But I am not taking away freedoms because you are scared. I am also not convicting an entire faith because you want someone else to hate.
 
Solitary said:
So helping educate the world is a liberal concept? So, if conservative is the opposite of liberal, then conservatives want the world to be ignorant?


And since the republicans have been in the whitehouse for 20 of the last 28 years, I would submit that it is the republicans that are responsible for the wide open border we have to our south. (which could have just as easily allowed terrorists in, especially prior to 9/11/01)

Dixie, you want to lock our borders and never let anyone else in? You think that will do us good??
Click to expand...

Yes Sol, "helping educate the world" is a completely LIBERAL concept! Just like, "helping feed the world" is a LIBERAL concept. Conservatives are NOT the "opposite" of Liberals, they merely have a different set of priorities. They don't "want the world to be ignorant", they just don't feel compelled or obligated to teach them. This has nothing to do with border policy or politics. It is just a fundamental difference between Liberalism and Conservatism.

The reason we haven't secured the Mexican border, is because Congress refuses to listen to the American people, a majority of which, wants this to be the top priority. McCain/Palin stand a much better chance at effectively solving this problem, than Obama/Biden, who just want to give them drivers license, voter cards, and a jackass lapel pin!

I don't believe we should lock our borders and not let anyone else in, I don't even believe we should do away with student visas, I just made the point that student visas are a liberal concept, which is the truth. It's not a conservative idea.... how the hell does it satisfy conservatism? It's purely an emotional, feel-good concept, which is the hallmark of Liberalism.
 
This is a retarded argument.

Student visas aren't at all like feeding the world. They aren't liberal or conservative.
 
ib1yysguy said:
This is a retarded argument.

Student visas aren't at all like feeding the world. They aren't liberal or conservative.
Click to expand...


You brain dead goofball, I didn't say student visas are like feeding the world. I said, the concept of 'helping to educate the world', is a liberal concept, not conservative. Just as 'helping to feed the world' or 'helping to cool the world' or 'helping to fund the world' or 'helping to subsidize the world' or helping to 'cure the world' or whatever! Liberals advocate "helping the world" not Conservatives, we don't really give a shit about the world unless there is money or tangible benefit to our capitalism involved. That sounds harsh, and I am sure some pinhead will distort it into a slam on me, but it's the truth of the matter, whether you admit it or not. It is what defines the difference between Liberalism and Conservatism, for the most part.

Think about it for a moment... When the whole idea of "educating foreign students" emerged... can you imagine a Conservative coming up with the idea... "Hey guys, you know it would be a really good idea for us to help educate the rest of the world!" Or is it more likely, this came from the mind of a Liberal? I mean, just use basic common sense here... who do you think came up with the idea? A con or a lib?
 
Dixie said:
Conservatives, we don't really give a shit about the world unless there is money or tangible benefit to our capitalism involved.
Click to expand...

How can that be distorted? That's pretty darn easy to read - and it's exactly why you guys can't get back in power until that philosophy is beaten out of your thick heads.
 
Solitary, you never answered this:

Should KNOW JIHADIST be issued student visas?

Yes or no.


This is not about free speech, it about controlling entrance to our nation.
 
Dixie said:
Yes Sol, "helping educate the world" is a completely LIBERAL concept! Just like, "helping feed the world" is a LIBERAL concept. Conservatives are NOT the "opposite" of Liberals, they merely have a different set of priorities. They don't "want the world to be ignorant", they just don't feel compelled or obligated to teach them. This has nothing to do with border policy or politics. It is just a fundamental difference between Liberalism and Conservatism.

The reason we haven't secured the Mexican border, is because Congress refuses to listen to the American people, a majority of which, wants this to be the top priority. McCain/Palin stand a much better chance at effectively solving this problem, than Obama/Biden, who just want to give them drivers license, voter cards, and a jackass lapel pin!

I don't believe we should lock our borders and not let anyone else in, I don't even believe we should do away with student visas, I just made the point that student visas are a liberal concept, which is the truth. It's not a conservative idea.... how the hell does it satisfy conservatism? It's purely an emotional, feel-good concept, which is the hallmark of Liberalism.
Click to expand...

Well, those international students pay top dollars for tuition. That allows the University not to raise tuition on american students, especially on the in-state students. I would think that conservatives would be all for making a profit and helping our students by taking lots of money from international students.
 
AssHatZombie said:
Solitary, you never answered this:

Should KNOW JIHADIST be issued student visas?

Yes or no.


This is not about free speech, it about controlling entrance to our nation.
Click to expand...

I can answer that like a stupid hippy. It depends. lol



OK--I can be a intelliegnet one now--It depends--if they get more American rights to defend themselfs in our court of law, after they take out a few more thousand people--yes. There are no illegal people. Don't you have any compassion. All--sniff--all--choke snif--all---snit snitt--BLOOOOOOWWWWWWW. Excuse me. I have a lot of misplaced passion---all I want to do is help people that I think are maaaad at meee. I don't want them to think I got fat at their expense--booohooo. We got in their sand box!! They should want to kill us!--they should they should they should want to cut off all of our heads--or use a dirty bomb in my university even--because --snob slobber--we are all guiltyyyyyyy when booooooooooooooooooooorn!!! Can't you have any compassion (which costs the tax payers---well--everything) for these people? ARE YOU ALL REPUBLICAAAAAAAAAAAAANNNNNSSSS!!!!--baw baw cry cry baw.

Yea folks----really great leaders for the interests of the USA and it's citizens. This is why I call them ---commies.
 
Last edited:
AssHatZombie said:
Solitary, you never answered this:

Should KNOW JIHADIST be issued student visas?

Yes or no.


This is not about free speech, it about controlling entrance to our nation.
Click to expand...

I am guessing that you meant "known jihadists", so I will go with that. No, anyone who is known to be a terrorist should not be allowed in the US on a visa. If by "jihad" you mean violence or terrorism, then the answer is obviously no. Jihad can also be an individual's striving for spiritual self-perfection, or a spiritual struggle. That is a definition that is used by many muslims who do not interpret the Quran to advocate violence.
 
Solitary said:
I am guessing that you meant "known jihadists", so I will go with that. No, anyone who is known to be a terrorist should not be allowed in the US on a visa. If by "jihad" you mean violence or terrorism, then the answer is obviously no. Jihad can also be an individual's striving for spiritual self-perfection, or a spiritual struggle. That is a definition that is used by many muslims who do not interpret the Quran to advocate violence.
Click to expand...
Violence is the primary meaning. Taqiyah means lying about the religion to infidels. They do that about what jihad means and idiots like you believe it.
 
Solitary said:
I am guessing that you meant "known jihadists", so I will go with that. No, anyone who is known to be a terrorist should not be allowed in the US on a visa. If by "jihad" you mean violence or terrorism, then the answer is obviously no. Jihad can also be an individual's striving for spiritual self-perfection, or a spiritual struggle. That is a definition that is used by many muslims who do not interpret the Quran to advocate violence.
Click to expand...


How do ya know? Is it the hair cut? Do the ones that want to do as much damage as they possilby can (and I am sure some of them are here now) have a different hair cut?

After 911--I would have made it up to straight up citizens, but I would have ronded them up man--as a matter of national security--to weed out any body questionable.

I know you comies don't like that (and I don't either)--but you forget the #1 reason of our federal government. it is their responsibility to protect it's citizens during war with international enemys.
 
Last edited:
AssHatZombie said:
Violence is the primary meaning. Taqiyah means lying about the religion to infidels. They do that about what jihad means and idiots like you believe it.
Click to expand...

And just like the bible has been interpreted to advocate violence, there are those who use the Quran to advocate violence. And those should be fought with every means at our disposal.

Those lunatics that use the bible to back their beliefs while they protest the funerals of soldiers are different from the Salvation Army, there are those who advocate violence and those who practice a peaceful Islam.

Stop the lunatics without persecuting those who do not follow them.

Its not that difficult.
 
theMAJORITY said:
How do ya know? Is it the hair cut? Do the ones that want to do as much damage as they possilby can (and I am sure some of them are here now) have a different hair cut?
Click to expand...

How do we know violent criminals from ordinary citizens? How do we tell boy scouts from rednecks who will beat a man to death for being gay? How do we tell the honorable soldier doing his duty from the freaks who enjoy torturing innocent civilians.

A free world is NOT a safe place. The only way to guarantee safety is to remove all freedoms.
 
Solitary said:
And just like the bible has been interpreted to advocate violence, there are those who use the Quran to advocate violence. And those should be fought with every means at our disposal.
Click to expand...
But in the bible, it is not a commandment to carry out ongoing violence. It references violence in the past and is no instruction to continue it going forward.
Those lunatics that use the bible to back their beliefs while they protest the funerals of soldiers are different from the Salvation Army, there are those who advocate violence and those who practice a peaceful Islam.

Stop the lunatics without persecuting those who do not follow them.

Its not that difficult.
Click to expand...

There are radicals but there is no scriptural support for what they do, unlike islam. It is apples and oranges.
 
AssHatZombie said:
But in the bible, it is not an commandment to carry out ongoing violence. It references violence in the past and is no instruction to continue it going forward.


There are radicals but there is no scriptural support for what they do, unlike islam. It is apples and oranges.
Click to expand...

They find plenty of backing for what they want to find. Just as most muslims find no backing for the terrorism.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top