Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
mrsx said:Your book clearly isn't the dictionary, which defines sedition as "conduct or language inciting rebellion against the authority of a state." I'm hardly doing that; merely pointing out that, having lied his way in, GWB is clueless about what he is facing or how to get out of Iraq. It is sanity, not sedition, to recognize the nature of the enemy he has provoked in Baghdad. Remember, my foaming fellow citizen, that Saddam & Co. had nothing to do with al Qaeda - that was just one of the lies the government used to con its citizens into a war that even the Pope called illegal and immoral. It was GWB, not I, who sullied the name of this country and of its armed forces with his lies, torture and war crimes. We are despised around the globe for what he has done, not because of what I have said. As for the Bible-thumping blowhards who cheer others on to death in the squalid sands of Iraq, they are the ones who undermine America with their tin-pot fascism. Get a life, you faux patriot looser - or at least get a dictionary!
No one is inciting insurrection or rebellion. I am dissenting from a disasterous government policy with is killing thousands, destroying our relationships with democratic nations and accelerating the end of American hegemony. There is a long tradition of regarding dissent as unpatriotic. It is called fascism.Trinity said:You just don't get it do you! Look at the second part of that definition MORON!
se·di·tion Pronunciation (s-dshn)
n.
1. Conduct or language inciting rebellion against the authority of a state.
2. Insurrection; rebellion.
and see if you can figure out how it applies to you!
Sir Evil said:
that the second time this loser has done this, the first was after she had told me to go back to school!
Mr. Evil has threatened to ban me from the board if I criticise him. It is that dedication to free speech and fair play which is his cutest feature. Fortunately, his infantile ravings require no refutation. Just jerking his chain in my spare moments is more fun than Tetris.Sir Evil said:Like many other trolls this is all opinion without facts to support.
And the only backdoor I can think of is the one you keep spouting insipid crap out of!
Oh, let me know if you need help with the definiton of anything in that reply.
Well that's a natural instinct I guess... My brothers and sister have pretty much been my parents throughout my life and they were pretty upset when I joined..colehart said:Everyone seems to want a strong defense, but not when it means me, my son or daughter.
What is the difference? I don't know what a troll is.Sir Evil said:I haven't threaten to ban you at all, in fact your addition is appreciated by all who are looking for something a little more fun than playing Tetris!
I have however said that I was not in violation for flaming you as that rule is for members and not trolls.
Now you are getting the point: Defense is not offence. Our activitiy in the Middle East - and this goes way back before 9/11 - is offensive. We are there because of the oil and have been manipulating the governments and culture of the region for our own interests. It is the same old imperialism that we've been suckered into by our ruling class for over 100 years. When the American people feel that we are defending ourselves as opposed to attacking others, there is never any problem with supplying the military.colehart said:Everyone seems to want a strong defense, but not when it means me, my son or daughter.
mrsx said:What is the difference? I don't know what a troll is.
mrsx said:Now you are getting the point: Defense is not offence. Our activitiy in the Middle East - and this goes way back before 9/11 - is offensive. We are there because of the oil and have been manipulating the governments and culture of the region for our own interests. It is the same old imperialism that we've been suckered into by our ruling class for over 100 years. When the American people feel that we are defending ourselves as opposed to attacking others, there is never any problem with supplying the military.
No, this is an opinion and not provable. It is based on observed facts, however, and explains the situation.Trinity said:and can you prove this?
Thank you for the definition. I don't think I am a troll. It appears to be a subjective classification rather than a technical status. What is the difference between a troll and a member? It seems to me that you are both; but then it may just be your avatar. BTW I know what avatar means in the real world. I don't see why you call your self-portrait your avatar. Please help this old lady to understand the mysteries of this sheltered workshop.Sir Evil said:
The invasion of Afghanistan was a response to the fact that the Taliban government was sheltering Osama bin Laden and refused to extradite him. This was a crucial moment in the so-called war on terrorism. Alas, by swerving aside to pursue the Iraq adventure, Bush left U.S. forces short-handed at the critical battle of Tora Bora and bin Laden escaped. Unable to finish pacification, he let the country slide into heroin producing chaos. His foolish decision to divert forces to Iraq, where no al Queda were operating, is the biggest military blunder since Hitler invaded the Soviet Union.Sir Evil said:
Ok, obvious to see that you are DU reject! Funny thing is with your kind is that we invaded for the oil yet prices on it keep going up. I take it Bush must be hoarding all that oil up down at his Texas ranch? So what is Afghanistan about?
mrsx said:The invasion of Afghanistan was a response to the fact that the Taliban government was sheltering Osama bin Laden and refused to extradite him. This was a crucial moment in the so-called war on terrorism. Alas, by swerving aside to pursue the Iraq adventure, Bush left U.S. forces short-handed at the critical battle of Tora Bora and bin Laden escaped. Unable to finish pacification, he let the country slide into heroin producing chaos. His foolish decision to divert forces to Iraq, where no al Queda were operating, is the biggest military blunder since Hitler invaded the Soviet Union.
You are correct - the are operating there now! Why? Because GWB overthrew the secular Ba'athist thugs we had supported, allowing the islamists to emerge as the defenders of Arab nationalism as well as of traditional religious and cultural values. Have you noticed that Hezboallah won the elections in Lebanon, which Bush has been touting as a benefit from the Iraq quagmire? There was a good reason why smart, conservative Republican experts on foreign affairs - men like Kissinger and Scowcroft - counseled against the Baghdad follies. They were right and the neocons were wrong, dead wrong with 1600 and counting. As the crown prince of Saudi Arabia told Bush, "you will bring the house down on all our heads."rtwngAvngr said:They're operating there now. And absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. Get your head out of your hole.
I wish you would explain what a member of this board is instead of flip-flopping around with all these stale rationalizations trying to prove that the Baghdad follies are some sort of geo-political master stroke.Sir Evil said:There has been more proof to support the facts that terrorism existed in Iraq than not. Regardles of that it's always the same old rhetoric from your side, There were no WMD's rubbish. The only reason that is brought up is because it's the only thing your side has that will hold any water. Iraq was lying stagnant on the table of the U.N for 12+ years, there were som many reasons that there was plenty just cause without the WMD's at all.
Now you cry of the escape of 1 man in Bin Laden as if catching him is going to change the face of terrorism all that much. Agreed that it would be a significant plus to the war on terrorism but that would be about it. Do you not think that there are already figures in place in case of his capture?
mrsx said:You are correct - the are operating there now! Why? Because GWB overthrew the secular Ba'athist thugs we had supported, allowing the islamists to emerge as the defenders of Arab nationalism as well as of traditional religious and cultural values. Have you noticed that Hezboallah won the elections in Lebanon, which Bush has been touting as a benefit from the Iraq quagmire? There was a good reason why smart, conservative Republican experts on foreign affairs - men like Kissinger and Scowcroft - counseled against the Baghdad follies. They were right and the neocons were wrong, dead wrong with 1600 and counting. As the crown prince of Saudi Arabia told Bush, "you will bring the house down on all our heads."
Sir Evil said:Many look right past a huge point on the terrorism front, where is Iraq? Right between Syria & Iran, two major players in supporting terrorism. Since day 1 of the invasion on Iraq the borders of those countries were leaking in terrorists of all kinds. Was it an issue to secure those borders? yep, but was it pushed that hard? Nope! Nailing these ragheads from this perspective has not been a bad strategy at all!
"Member" and "troll" aren't defined by any rules or standards? It is just a matter of subjectively determined "intent?" Let me guess which mind reader gets to pronounce the "intent" of any given poster... let me see... Could it be someone who names himself "Evil," who is self-identified as "pure evil?" That seems fair and logical doesn't it?Sir Evil said:Good reply, too bad you have nothing to rebuff my admission!
Member - a person who takes part with well thought out replies and posts, a person of purposeful intent, a person wishing to discuss and debate with honest intentions.
Mrsx/troll - a person who posts soley to be disruptive and has no honest intention of good debating or discussing.
