Lying liberals, at it again,,,and again, and...

Discussion in 'Middle East - General' started by LuvRPgrl, Dec 3, 2005.

  1. LuvRPgrl

    LuvRPgrl Senior Member

    Aug 11, 2005
    Thanks Received:
    Trophy Points:
    I just read this, this morning:

    Now, this is the type of source, which lacks credibility, which I DONT use (note that its a liberal publication), an and example of a LIE, cuz it was obviously meant to deceive:

    From the "Daily Howl"

    "Almost instantly, deceived, misled readers of the Washington Times began sending in angry letters. The Times had lied in their faces about What Clinton Said—but readers had no way of knowing.

    But did Clinton say that "America got what it deserved?" The statement is complete, utter nonsense. There is nothing resembling that view in his speech—though readers of the Washington Times couldn’t know that. The Washington Times had deceived its readers

    How had the Times misled its readers? Let’s start with the headline of its original piece about the Clinton speech. "Clinton calls terror a U.S. debt to past," said the November 8, page-one headline. In fact, Clinton had noted—in a brief, fleeting comment—that terroristic behavior had been directed at blacks and native Americans in the American past. And he noted—again in passing—that the west had engaged in acts of terror against Islam during the Crusades. (For the record, the accuracy of these fleeting remarks is, of course, blindingly obvious.) But nowhere did Clinton ever say or suggest that we therefore "got what we deserved" on September 11—though Joseph Curl and the Washington Times labored long and hard to convey that impression. That’s right—on Thursday, Curl and his editors deceived Snopek and Migala. Only Ruesch had seen Clinton’s speech. Ruesch, therefore, was quite "perplexed" by the way the Times described it."

    Yet, here is a partial copy of Clintons speech. It was rather long that he dwelled on the topic of our past terrorism, its history and our responsability for it, not the "FLEETING COMMENT" this liberal rag claims it was. Plus, note the very fist sentence....

    "Those of us who come from various European lineages are not blameless. Indeed, in the first Crusade, when the Christian soldiers took Jerusalem, they first burned a synagogue with 300 Jews in it, and proceeded to kill every woman and child who was Muslim on the Temple mound. The contemporaneous descriptions of the event describe soldiers walking on the Temple mound, a holy place to Christians, with blood running up to their knees. I can tell you that that story is still being told to today in the Middle East and we are still paying for it. Here in the United States, we were founded as a nation that practiced slavery and slaves were, quite frequently, killed even though they were innocent. This country once looked the other way when significant numbers of Native Americans were dispossessed and killed to get their land or their mineral rights or because they were thought of as less than fully human and we are still paying the price today. Even in the 20th century in America people were terrorized or killed because of their race. And even today, though we have continued to walk, sometimes to stumble, in the right direction, we still have the occasional hate crime rooted in race, religion, or sexual orientation. So terror has a long history."

    YES, he did blame our past actions on the reasons for todays terrorism. "We are not blameless",,,i.e. WE ARE TO BLAME, at least partially.

    Talk about LYING.....

    Im also wondering, I heard on a fairly reliable radio show that Kennedy, Kerry and his running mate, john something or other, all chose not to click a box that would return their income tax cuts from Bush's tax cuts.

    If anyone has any info on this, I would dearly appreciate it. You can PM me if you like. Oh by the way, USMC devil dog, you sent me a PM a while back, I was not able to receive it cuz my box was full,,,,if you care to send it again, I would appreciate it...

Share This Page