English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

when the broke the story regarding financial monitoring, did you cry as loud when the Criminal Junta sent them to Iraq?

Which decision poses are more imminent threat, news article or armed conflict?

**Yes Yes I know. I will preemtively smile at those that will call me names with the word liberal attached to it. :)

Take your best shot.

"bring it on" haha

2006-06-27 05:33:50 · 11 answers · asked by Pretty_Trini_Rican 5 in Politics & Government Other - Politics & Government

I may be an idiot but at least I am an idiot that knows that "you're" is a contraction of you are and that "your" is a possessive noun.

2006-06-27 06:22:54 · update #1

I don't call anyone Nazi and I have commented on how this government is/was looking very much like a facist one.

I don't get into the political namecalling game much. It's old and tiresome.

2006-06-27 06:24:10 · update #2

11 answers

And what about that CIA lady that Rove had killed cause her husband was a critic? Oh yeah he denied it..so it must not be true...lol.

What happened to the guy Cheney shot while hunting with their mistresses?

That story kinda disappeared.

And what IS the deal between Bush and Rice? lol cant get that image out of my mind (true or not its just funny)

Remember when the nazis get mad and call names its cause your point hit home. Maybe one will disagree respectfully? Not likely...but would be a nice change.

btw. Liberal simply means free...Con means trick.

PS just read Larry's post....there it goes again the persistent view that Iraq was connected to the towers...where do they get this info from? A couple of headlines and these people will want to invade anyplace and kill anyone. The power of propaganda.

Love your enemy good Christians.

2006-06-27 05:46:14 · answer #1 · answered by DaddyBoy 4 · 0 1

I'll disagree with you. And I almost never call anyone names. Especially names like Criminal Junta. You probably used names like fascist and nazi until they lost their shock factor.

Terrorist threats existed long before Bush took office. Most of the programs the NYT writes about existed pre Bush. But we never heard a thing during Clinton's time. Do you ever wonder why?

I'm all for freedom of the press when it comes to exposing corporate, private, or political scandals. But when it comes to their reporting what we are doing to stop things that go bump in the night. I don't want to know because if I know the things that go bump know too.

I depend on MY government to do what they can to bump back. And maybe I wouldn't always agree with their method of bumping. But that's not my call. That is up to legislators.

And I KNOW one thing. The NYT didn't stop the first terrorist attack on the WTC and they didn't stop the second. In fact they have done less to stop terrorism world wide than the UN.

Like the commercial says talk is cheap. And that is all the NYT is....talk. Talk is also worthless when it comes after the fact. Now if the NYT goes public BEFORE the next attack that would be a different story.

OBTW Terrorists will NEVER bomb the NYT. Why would they destroy their best intelligence source.

2006-06-27 05:59:25 · answer #2 · answered by namsaev 6 · 0 0

Whether or not we should be fighting international terrorists or not, the fact remains, we are. One of the non-violent ways our government is trying to stop these international terrorists is by putting an end to their flow of money. The current story run by news papers across the country have now made it harder for our government to accomplish the stoppage of monies to international terrorists. I believe in free speech, but not when it helps enemies of this country. A fact is a fact, we are at war, and the only way it is going to end is by winning. Helping the enemy by telling them the ways with are secretly fighting them will not bring our troops home any earlier.

2006-06-27 06:08:46 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

Who was the "Republican" who leaked the "monitoring" story? According to Bu$h Congress was aware of the story. What he means is that "Republicans" in Congress were told.
Do you think Cheney and Scooter will go to prison for treason?
I really think Scooter will roll over on Cheney and cop a plea to a lessor charge.
Today I looked into the eyes of Christina Menchaca, she is 18 years old, her tears for her Husband Pfc. Kristen of Brownsville Texas, who was 23 years old and died in Iraq. I was taken by her sadness and given by her tears a real reminder that "war is hell", war is about killing and it's also about service men giving all. Those that have never been in war will never, never understand. They would vote for Bu$h again if they could.

2006-06-29 02:39:32 · answer #4 · answered by jl_jack09 6 · 0 0

What I find amusing is the fact that they think we didn't already know that they would do exactly that anyway. The try to act all surprised, and self-righteous about it. I have yet to see anything that any news organization has done that has put anyone in danger. The current administrations own actions are proof of their own incompetence, as well as their own guilt of crimes against the American people.

2006-06-27 05:46:46 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

oh gee, somebody leaked this to the NYT, was it a democrat, Lets see, Bush in the white house, No he is a repuglican, Congress is repuglican too. Must have been one of the justices so that they would have something to do when it gets to court as everybody is repuglican in government these days and they wouldn't leak anything right!!!!!

2006-06-27 05:43:47 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

Treason is treason no matter what nice little label you want to put on it. We were attacked and we had to go after the perpetrators. This is like no war before because it was not a country that attacked us. It was cowards hiding in the shadows. So, how do you hit back? You have to find out who is supporting them and attack them.

If a drug dealer is selling to your kids, but you can't catch him, do you not want the police to go after that dealer's connection, and all drug dealers?

2006-06-27 05:39:24 · answer #7 · answered by FozzieBear 7 · 0 0

What are we supposed to do, sit back and let terrorists kill us? Because we are so big and bad that we need to be brought down to size? Our troops are over there fighting for scumbags like you that don't even know how to appreciate this country. The NYT is trying to kill them because it would make Bush look bad, and that is their business. It is despicable.

2006-06-27 05:45:39 · answer #8 · answered by Christopher 4 · 0 0

did you cry when the leak of the non-secret agent valerie plame was leaked?

or are only certain leaks good?


as for the war, getting beyond how/why we went in, are the iraqis and us not better off for it? by even the craziest biased estimates, people are dieing at a much smaller rate now than when saddam was ruling...

2006-06-27 05:39:39 · answer #9 · answered by jasonalwaysready 4 · 0 0

Did you cry harder when the troops went into battle....or when the towers came down? "More" imminent threat? that's kind of ridiculous....imminent threat is as bad as it needs to be. Die in battle...or die in your mom's office....which is worse? GEEZ! We argue about some of the stupidest things!

2006-06-27 05:42:26 · answer #10 · answered by Larry B 2 · 0 0

fedest.com, questions and answers