why is it that Cons still think Iraq did 911?

Lets jsut ask the Iraqi people if its AQ who is dying in their country?

Its Al Queda that is targeting and killing innocent Iraqis desh... which is why the Sunni turned on Al Queda.

The point is not who is dying... but who are the Iraqi people currently fighting? Sectarian violence as dropped dramatically. The main opponent left in Iraq is Al Queda.
 
You claim to have the context, let's see it.

I have. She was talking about the fight against Al Queda. That is who we are primarily fighting in Iraq. You do realize that don't you? Or do you think it is still Saddam we are fighting?

The Iraqi government, the Sunni fighters and the US are currently lined up together and going after Al Queda. That is our primary opponent. To pretend she was trying to link Saddam's Iraq with 9/11 is simply pathetic.

But I expect that from DeshBush. Her Rovian distortions are well known.
 
I have. She was talking about the fight against Al Queda. That is who we are primarily fighting in Iraq. You do realize that don't you? Or do you think it is still Saddam we are fighting?

The Iraqi government, the Sunni fighters and the US are currently lined up together and going after Al Queda. That is our primary opponent. To pretend she was trying to link Saddam's Iraq with 9/11 is simply pathetic.

But I expect that from DeshBush. Her Rovian distortions are well known.


OK, can I see the context? I can't find a transcript.
 
OK, can I see the context? I can't find a transcript.
Neither can I actually. All I have is reports of the theme of the speech, which was 'service'.

As far as I understand the line was about protecting innocents abroad, in Iraq, against people who had taken action against the US and how noble it was to protect those innocents. She also stressed the importance of their service, making the point that others choose to do much less and take a far easier course.

But this is from an e-mail from a friend who works in the Pentagon who worked for the dude that had to approve the speech as 'apolitical'. I do not have a transcript of the speech.
 
Well lets see.....

The conservatives have said gays cannot serve in the military, they don't want them to be teachers, won't let them marry, have called them vile and disgusting, have said they are an "abomination", and some have even claimed that they can be cured by prayer.

I cannot imagine why the gay community hasn't embraced the conservative movement. Can you?

I see your points. Thak you. That is one of the things I don't like about hard core consertatives that are fanatics with their religion (even mother teresa said fanatics are a big problem).

I think I think of consertativism the correct way--a America with freedom of religion, and their beliefs--and from religion if wanted.

To me, a consertative is simply a person who loves the premis of which this country was founded. All people free to do amazing things. A federal government with limited power, so we can be as free as possible, and invit all here that want to be free from their socialistic/communistic opressive countries.

I did meet a hom that is consertative. He thinks he sould be able to reep the benifits of his rewards, and he said he would punch me in the mouth if I had a problem with him being gay. I don't have a problem with someone being gay--I just did not understand why most of them adopted a liberial mentality. This guy was pretty cool I thought.

I ask you to do what I do, and seperate christians religions beliefs of gays, to what consertativism is really suppose to be--the conservation of USA, capatoilsm, ownership, free will to drive our SUV, eat what we want, and keep our homes warm--no matter what some other socialistic/communistic country thinks. We also do a lot of good in the world, because of our position. For example, no other country gives as much international aid to countries in need of natural disaster. There are many more.

I don't think you have to jump to socialism--and I think it is a mistake.

I would much rather you start your own consertative party for your country, but seperate your love for your country from their love for their religion. The way America is suppose to be IMO.

by the way---my area (I moved here--not raised--thank god) is about 70% christian--plenty of fanatics, and they bug me. I hear it is a cure also--some try, and even become priests driven by a imposed guilt. What happes to them--they let their dark side out all at once--and attack a little boy--ruingin his life. Then--they shuffeled the offender to lead a new church--and nobody went to jail. Seems that they won't admitt they are wrong. Lots of gays here, being talked into being cured--the result--a child molestion rate twice of a comparable sized city in Michigan, and per capita.

I just don't think liberials love this country. I know they hate some things--I do to---but that is no reason to let socialism and communisum into this country.

I can accept you as gay--and I do--I can't accept you as one of todays Marksist liberials.

I hope all you convert away from socialism for your country--and screw the fanatics.

it is a fact--when a element is intorduced (coming out of the closet) to a population that is not part of that element--there will be some adjustment period. The blacks went through it in the 60's and 70'a, and if they would just stop bringing it up--it would be over. I know the homosexual populaiton is still in this adjustment period in some circles--but that is still no reason to sell out every bodies freedom.

Please reconsider. I think your good people on here, but I think your on the wrong side, and despise America because of how you have been treated during this adjustment period (which I think is really at it's ending).

let me tell you something. I have one brother. he is gay. I never heard one disscuasion (let alone a argument) in our family about him being gay. I learned he was gay, when I started getting teased in HS. My family totally acdepted my brothers homosexuality, but he still hates our dad, and is a die hard liberial. Heck--he used to be pretty mechanically inclined. He worked on his four stroke motorcycle engine as a kid, and bicycles--but now--for example--I bought him a electric scooter for Christmas (we still celibrate christmas--mom loves it)--anfd it need a round pin--pounded in a round hole for a pivot point to fold the handle bars down. 14 year old kids assemble it all the time--and he could no longer figure it out. What the hell happened to him, also letting his career go (and he has mad skills)---I don't know---but he is a liberial now---probably only because of gay rights. Hey--I will help society adjust to you--just stop forcing socialism on these other fine people. It really is killing America.
 
Last edited:
I'm just trying to understand SF's claim that she was taken out of context. It seems that no one has the context (thinkprogress has a video of the speech but I can't stand to watch it). Anyone want to watch the video and give me a time marker?
 
OK, can I see the context? I can't find a transcript.

neither can I... but not once does she state that Iraq was involved in 9/11. She did however state that they were going to fight those responsible for 9/11. Which they are. They are going to fight Al Queda in Iraq. The largest opponent left in Iraq.

edit... I cannot see video at work or I would have. But in the quote that the WA post used, she doesn't say Iraq was responsible or had a part in 9/11. THAT is what I mean by taking it out of context. The title of the WA Post article is misleading.... and deshbush is simply following along like a good little dem soldier and repeating the idiocy word for word.
 
Last edited:
neither can I... but not once does she state that Iraq was involved in 9/11. She did however state that they were going to fight those responsible for 9/11. Which they are. They are going to fight Al Queda in Iraq. The largest opponent left in Iraq.

edit... I cannot see video at work or I would have. But in the quote that the WA post used, she doesn't say Iraq was responsible or had a part in 9/11. THAT is what I mean by taking it out of context. The title of the WA Post article is misleading.... and deshbush is simply following along like a good little dem soldier and repeating the idiocy word for word.


Well, Al Qaeda in Iraq didn't exist as of 9/11/01 so it doesn't make sense to say that fighting Al Qaeda in Iraq is fighting the people responsible for 9/11.
 
Well, Al Qaeda in Iraq didn't exist as of 9/11/01 so it doesn't make sense to say that fighting Al Qaeda in Iraq is fighting the people responsible for 9/11.
She's not arguing to invade Iraq, she's talking about this current time frame.
 
She's not arguing to invade Iraq, she's talking about this current time frame.


Yes, and in the current time frame arguing that fighting Al Qaeda in Iraq is fighting the people responsible for 9/11 (if that even is what she meant) is factually false.
 
Al Queda in Iraq has no connection to the real al Queda whatssoever. Its just the name the Bush admin gave it to try to draw the connection. See General Petraus's testamony on the subject from last year.
 
Well, Al Qaeda in Iraq didn't exist as of 9/11/01 so it doesn't make sense to say that fighting Al Qaeda in Iraq is fighting the people responsible for 9/11.

That is one of the dumbest things I have ever seen you write. AL Queda is responsible for 9/11. The group Al Queda in Iraq is affiliated with that group. Al Queda in Iraq came there to fight the US.

There not being in Iraq prior to 9/11 doesn't change the fact that they are there today... and they are the ones the soldiers are fighting against.
 
Yes, and in the current time frame arguing that fighting Al Qaeda in Iraq is fighting the people responsible for 9/11 (if that even is what she meant) is factually false.
I think it is more generalized, fighting radicalized Islam, which seeks to attack those who wish to remain innocent in Iraq as well as Americans (carefully worded to be more politically correct). I think SF is pushing it to fit when he doesn't have to, the speech was far more general because it had to be carefully crafted to be apolitical because it was a speech given on a military base.

The military is very picky about the apolitical thing.
 
I have been arguing with the idiot Maj (formerly known as SJ?)

The depth of his ignorance is astounding. Of course, since I disagree with him I am automatically a commie fag. Odd how sexuality ties in with politics for him, isn't it?

Not just a commie fag, but part of the lib homosexual mafia! Don’t sell yourself short!
 
That is one of the dumbest things I have ever seen you write. AL Queda is responsible for 9/11. The group Al Queda in Iraq is affiliated with that group. Al Queda in Iraq came there to fight the US.

There not being in Iraq prior to 9/11 doesn't change the fact that they are there today... and they are the ones the soldiers are fighting against.


In 2001, the group that today is called Al Qaeda in Iraq had nothing to do with Al Qaeda.
 
That is one of the dumbest things I have ever seen you write. AL Queda is responsible for 9/11. The group Al Queda in Iraq is affiliated with that group. Al Queda in Iraq came there to fight the US.

There not being in Iraq prior to 9/11 doesn't change the fact that they are there today... and they are the ones the soldiers are fighting against.

You know what, stop calling people dumb, both you and Damo. You are being so thick here, of course she is conflating the two, and once again, you and Damo are desperately searching for some technicality to get her off on. He’s not the one writing dumb shit on this board lately, I can tell you that. And neither am I.
 
You know what, stop calling people dumb, both you and Damo. You are being so thick here, of course she is conflating the two, and once again, you and Damo are desperately searching for some technicality to get her off on. He’s not the one writing dumb shit on this board lately, I can tell you that. And neither am I.


What is worse is that the technicality that SF cites to is a lie.

Of course, this Palin conflation comes from the same people that brought you the Iraq War and the "the Administration never said that Iraq was responsible for 9/11" and that just couldn't figure out why a majority of the American people wrongly believed it.
 
Back
Top