Retired Admiral Let's It Go!

[Camp]

The problem is the Koran and it's infallibility for Muslims.

The following are direct quotes from the Quran and the Hadith:

Quran 4:89: "They (infidels) desire that you should disbelieve as they have disbelieved, so that you might be (all) alike; therefore take not from among them friends until they fly (their homes) in Allah's way; but if they turn back, then seize them and kill them wherever you find them, and take not from among them a friend or a helper."

Quran 8:12: "Instill terror into the hearts of the unbelievers;"

Quran 2:191: "... kill the disbelievers wherever we find them

Quran 22:19-22: "… for them (the unbelievers) garments of fire shall be cut and there shall be poured over their heads boiling water whereby whatever is in their bowels and skin shall be dissolved and they will be punished with hooked iron rods."

Quran 8:12: "Your Lord inspired the angels with the message: 'I will terrorize the unbelievers. Therefore smite them on their necks and every joint and incapacitate them. Strike off their heads and cut off each of their fingers and toes.'"

Qur'an:8:12 "I shall terrorize the infidels. So wound their bodies and incapacitate them because they oppose Allah and His Apostle."

Quran 8:7: "Allah wished to confirm the truth by His words: 'Wipe the infidels out to the last.'"

Quran 8:59: "The infidels should not think that they can get away from us. Prepare against them whatever arms and weaponry you can muster so that you may terrorize them. They are your enemy and Allah's enemy."

Quran 8:60: "Prepare against them whatever arms and cavalry you can muster that you may strike terror in the enemies of Allah, and others besides them not known to you."

Quran 9.29" "Fight those who do not believe in Allah, nor in the latter day, nor do they prohibit what Allah and His Apostle have prohibited, nor follow the religion of truth, out of those who have been given the Book, until they pay the tax in acknowledgment of superiority and they are in a state of subjection."

Quran 47:4: "Strike off the heads of the disbelievers" and, after making a "wide slaughter among them, carefully tie up the remaining captives."

Hadith Sahih Muslim (41:6985): "Abu Huraira reported Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) as saying: 'The last hour would not come unless the Muslims will fight against the Jews and the Muslims would kill them until the Jews would hide themselves behind a stone or a tree and a stone or a tree would say: Muslim, the servant of Allah, there is a Jew behind me; come and kill him; but the tree Gharqad would not say, for it is the tree of the Jews.'"

Quran 9:5: "When the sacred forbidden months for fighting are past, fight and kill the disbelievers wherever you find them, take them captive, torture them, and lie in wait and ambush them using every stratagem of war."

Sura 3:151: "Soon shall We cast terror into the hearts of the unbelievers for that they joined companions with Allah for which He had sent no authority: their abode will be the fire; and evil is the home of the wrong-doers!"

Sura 8:60: "Against them make ready your strength to the utmost of your power including steeds of war to strike terror into (the hearts of) the enemies of Allah and your enemies and others besides whom ye may not know but whom Allah doth know. Whatever ye shall spend in the cause of Allah shall be repaid unto you and ye shall not be treated unjustly."

Tabari IX "Allah permits you to shut them (women) in separate rooms and to beat them, but not severely. If they abstain, they have the right to food and clothing. Treat women well for they are like domestic animals and they possess nothing themselves. Allah has made the enjoyment of their bodies lawful in his Quran."

Tabari I:280: "Allah said, 'It is My obligation to make Eve bleed once every month as she made this tree bleed. I must also make Eve stupid, although I created her intelligent.' Because Allah afflicted Eve, all of the women of this world menstruate and are stupid."

Ishaq:327: "Allah said, 'A prophet must slaughter before collecting captives. A slaughtered enemy is driven from the land. Muhammad, you craved the desires of this world, its goods and the ransom captives would bring. But Allah desires killing them to manifest the religion.'"

These quotations are not out of context. They are representative of dozens and dozens of other messages in the Islamic "holy" texts. Clearly, they have inspired the violent and hateful behavior of followers.

I know there are many peaceful Muslims who view them allegorically rather than literally. Yet, is it outside the bounds of civil public discourse to challenge such statements?

I think it would be irresponsible to ignore how the Quran instructs its followers.
Book of hate


Bukhari:V4B52N220 "Allah's Apostle said, 'I have been made victorious with terror.'"



Get your head out of the sand.

Fine. What ever.

Here's a better solution.

Let's tell all the fundamentalist Muslims to go to Iraq. Then we will let all of the Orthodox Jews and fundamentalist Christians in this country that if they want to take their holy books THAT seriously, that they can join up for a cost, and the Army will train them up, and everyone can just go duke it out the old fashioned way in the dessert, you know, with sword, knives, cavalry, the good stuff.

Just so we can keep women and child and innocent civilians out of it. Even you can go and get all that hatred and centuries old superstition, fear and loathing out of your system.

No one leaves until everyone on one side or the other is gone. No quarter. That way fundamentalists from either one side or the other are gone.

Enough of this fundamentalist non-sense.



I can't believe you actually BELIEVE that every single Muslim on the planet believes each and every verse in the Quran and is a fundamentalist. I really am astounded that you are so intellectually dull as to believe that type of war propaganda. Fundamentalists in their respective religions make up a minority of both Christians and Jews, yet you somehow want to believe the war propaganda that the majority of Muslims are fundamentalists. Balderdash.

I live in the state with the highest percentage of Muslims, and every single one I have ever met is moderate. Actually, no, that's not true. A large percentage of them are liberal. Most of the women don't even wear the hijab except in exclusive enclaves. You WATCH AND READ TOO MUCH WAR PROPAGANDA.

"I live in the state with the highest percentage of Muslims, and every single one I have ever met is moderate."

The plural of 'anecdote' is not 'data.'

Sure it is. You just don't know how to compile it to form a usable or actionable reference unless someone else does it for you and you are able to cut a paste the results.

Bingo. PC is a regurgitator. She simply repeats. She doesn't actually understand most of what she's repeating. And when questioned about it, either cuts and pastes another source she doesn't understand. Or shuts down.

A xerox can do as much.

Wait....you retracted your post claiming how smart Clinton was.....a Rhodes Scholar???

Why did you remove it?

That post made my day! You're one of those imbeciles who believes that those awards that Liberals give each other are actually deserved!!!

Obama got the Nobel Prize for tying his shoelaces.

And Krugman!!!!


Watch how I prove.....not show, PROVE what a moron you are!




8. How about Rhodes Scholars.....being named such must mean one is really smart, huh?


"The two major-party presidential candidates in 2000 had above-average SAT scores: 1206 for George W. Bush and 1355 for Al Gore. Many public officials decline to reveal their scores. Former New Jersey senator Bill Bradley (D), a Princeton University graduate and Rhodes Scholar, declined to comment on widespread reports during the 2000 primary election season that his verbal score on the SAT was 485. Verbal and math scores, each with a possible high of 800, are combined to get the overall SAT score. Because of a scoring readjustment, SAT scores before 1995 were somewhat lower for the same number of right answers.


.... the late Minnesota Sen. Paul D. Wellstone (D) had written in an article published in 2000. His SAT score reportedly was below 900.
Bad Scores Good Company washingtonpost.com

More proof of how inaccurate and just plain silly PC's cut and paste nonsense is. SAT scores have nothing to do with obtaining the Rhodes Scholarship. It is a two year scholarship that uses various criteria and awarded to students who are attending colleges and have a grade average for reference. Many students with 4.0 grade standings got into college with minimum SAT scores. There are other criteria as well, making it possible for a student to receive the scholarship with less than a spectacular grade point average. Indications of motivation and leadership are important criteria for the scholarship. The world "scholar" is used as a reference to a scholarship, not an indication of genius. The Rhodes Scholarship is prestigious and may indicate above average intelligence, but it certainly doesn't indicate high SAT scores and high SAT scores does not always indicate above average intelligence.

 

[Wry Catcher]

Fine. What ever.

Here's a better solution.

Let's tell all the fundamentalist Muslims to go to Iraq. Then we will let all of the Orthodox Jews and fundamentalist Christians in this country that if they want to take their holy books THAT seriously, that they can join up for a cost, and the Army will train them up, and everyone can just go duke it out the old fashioned way in the dessert, you know, with sword, knives, cavalry, the good stuff.

Just so we can keep women and child and innocent civilians out of it. Even you can go and get all that hatred and centuries old superstition, fear and loathing out of your system.

No one leaves until everyone on one side or the other is gone. No quarter. That way fundamentalists from either one side or the other are gone.

Enough of this fundamentalist non-sense.



I can't believe you actually BELIEVE that every single Muslim on the planet believes each and every verse in the Quran and is a fundamentalist. I really am astounded that you are so intellectually dull as to believe that type of war propaganda. Fundamentalists in their respective religions make up a minority of both Christians and Jews, yet you somehow want to believe the war propaganda that the majority of Muslims are fundamentalists. Balderdash.

I live in the state with the highest percentage of Muslims, and every single one I have ever met is moderate. Actually, no, that's not true. A large percentage of them are liberal. Most of the women don't even wear the hijab except in exclusive enclaves. You WATCH AND READ TOO MUCH WAR PROPAGANDA.

"I live in the state with the highest percentage of Muslims, and every single one I have ever met is moderate."

The plural of 'anecdote' is not 'data.'

Sure it is. You just don't know how to compile it to form a usable or actionable reference unless someone else does it for you and you are able to cut a paste the results.

Bingo. PC is a regurgitator. She simply repeats. She doesn't actually understand most of what she's repeating. And when questioned about it, either cuts and pastes another source she doesn't understand. Or shuts down.

A xerox can do as much.

Wait....you retracted your post claiming how smart Clinton was.....a Rhodes Scholar???

Why did you remove it?

That post made my day! You're one of those imbeciles who believes that those awards that Liberals give each other are actually deserved!!!

Obama got the Nobel Prize for tying his shoelaces.

And Krugman!!!!


Watch how I prove.....not show, PROVE what a moron you are!




8. How about Rhodes Scholars.....being named such must mean one is really smart, huh?


"The two major-party presidential candidates in 2000 had above-average SAT scores: 1206 for George W. Bush and 1355 for Al Gore. Many public officials decline to reveal their scores. Former New Jersey senator Bill Bradley (D), a Princeton University graduate and Rhodes Scholar, declined to comment on widespread reports during the 2000 primary election season that his verbal score on the SAT was 485. Verbal and math scores, each with a possible high of 800, are combined to get the overall SAT score. Because of a scoring readjustment, SAT scores before 1995 were somewhat lower for the same number of right answers.


.... the late Minnesota Sen. Paul D. Wellstone (D) had written in an article published in 2000. His SAT score reportedly was below 900.
Bad Scores Good Company washingtonpost.com

More proof of how inaccurate and just plain silly PC's cut and paste nonsense is. SAT scores have nothing to do with obtaining the Rhodes Scholarship. It is a two year scholarship that uses various criteria and awarded to students who are attending colleges and have a grade average for reference. Many students with 4.0 grade standings got into college with minimum SAT scores. There are other criteria as well, making it possible for a student to receive the scholarship with less than a spectacular grade point average. Indications of motivation and leadership are important criteria for the scholarship. The world "scholar" is used as a reference to a scholarship, not an indication of genius. The Rhodes Scholarship is prestigious and may indicate above average intelligence, but it certainly doesn't indicate high SAT scores and high SAT scores does not always indicate above average intelligence.

True, high scores may also be the result of parents paying a private agency to prepare the student for the test. Teaching to the test makes better scores, but has no more relationship to critical thinking then making a phone call by rote or opening up a combination lock of long use.

 

[Skylar]

Wait....you retracted your post claiming how smart Clinton was.....a Rhodes Scholar???

Why did you remove it?

I've made no such post. You're hallucinating.

Can I take it from your bizarre switch from your geriatric former admiral spouting off about topics he knows nothing about to hallucinations on 'how smart Clinton is', that this conversation didn't go the way you'd planned?

 

[Jarhead]

So are y

Ace is an alcoholic, has been for a very long time, since our Sec of State kicked his ass in SVN a very long time ago.

So are you denying the quote of the Turkish President because it was regurgitated by a "drunk"?

 

[Jarhead]

"I live in the state with the highest percentage of Muslims, and every single one I have ever met is moderate."

The plural of 'anecdote' is not 'data.'

Sure it is. You just don't know how to compile it to form a usable or actionable reference unless someone else does it for you and you are able to cut a paste the results.

Bingo. PC is a regurgitator. She simply repeats. She doesn't actually understand most of what she's repeating. And when questioned about it, either cuts and pastes another source she doesn't understand. Or shuts down.

A xerox can do as much.

Wait....you retracted your post claiming how smart Clinton was.....a Rhodes Scholar???

Why did you remove it?

That post made my day! You're one of those imbeciles who believes that those awards that Liberals give each other are actually deserved!!!

Obama got the Nobel Prize for tying his shoelaces.

And Krugman!!!!


Watch how I prove.....not show, PROVE what a moron you are!




8. How about Rhodes Scholars.....being named such must mean one is really smart, huh?


"The two major-party presidential candidates in 2000 had above-average SAT scores: 1206 for George W. Bush and 1355 for Al Gore. Many public officials decline to reveal their scores. Former New Jersey senator Bill Bradley (D), a Princeton University graduate and Rhodes Scholar, declined to comment on widespread reports during the 2000 primary election season that his verbal score on the SAT was 485. Verbal and math scores, each with a possible high of 800, are combined to get the overall SAT score. Because of a scoring readjustment, SAT scores before 1995 were somewhat lower for the same number of right answers.


.... the late Minnesota Sen. Paul D. Wellstone (D) had written in an article published in 2000. His SAT score reportedly was below 900.
Bad Scores Good Company washingtonpost.com

More proof of how inaccurate and just plain silly PC's cut and paste nonsense is. SAT scores have nothing to do with obtaining the Rhodes Scholarship. It is a two year scholarship that uses various criteria and awarded to students who are attending colleges and have a grade average for reference. Many students with 4.0 grade standings got into college with minimum SAT scores. There are other criteria as well, making it possible for a student to receive the scholarship with less than a spectacular grade point average. Indications of motivation and leadership are important criteria for the scholarship. The world "scholar" is used as a reference to a scholarship, not an indication of genius. The Rhodes Scholarship is prestigious and may indicate above average intelligence, but it certainly doesn't indicate high SAT scores and high SAT scores does not always indicate above average intelligence.

True, high scores may also be the result of parents paying a private agency to prepare the student for the test. Teaching to the test makes better scores, but has no more relationship to critical thinking then making a phone call by rote or opening up a combination lock of long use.

Curious...are you aware of who are the employees of those private agencies that prepare students for the exams at a cost?

Teachers. Public school teachers. Yes, those teachers that only care about the children are tutoring for extra money after 3 PM....as opposed to offering free tutoring after 3PM to all students...including those that cant afford off site tutoring.

Now, I know...."Why cant teachers have the right to make extra money when they are not in school?"

Not saying they cant.......but since their day ends at 3PM as opposed to the normal 5PM, why cant they tutor til 5 PM for free and THEN tutor after work hours for cash....you know....like normal people who work 8:30-5 and then work a night job for extra cash?

 

[Wry Catcher]

Sure it is. You just don't know how to compile it to form a usable or actionable reference unless someone else does it for you and you are able to cut a paste the results.

Bingo. PC is a regurgitator. She simply repeats. She doesn't actually understand most of what she's repeating. And when questioned about it, either cuts and pastes another source she doesn't understand. Or shuts down.

A xerox can do as much.

Wait....you retracted your post claiming how smart Clinton was.....a Rhodes Scholar???

Why did you remove it?

That post made my day! You're one of those imbeciles who believes that those awards that Liberals give each other are actually deserved!!!

Obama got the Nobel Prize for tying his shoelaces.

And Krugman!!!!


Watch how I prove.....not show, PROVE what a moron you are!




8. How about Rhodes Scholars.....being named such must mean one is really smart, huh?


"The two major-party presidential candidates in 2000 had above-average SAT scores: 1206 for George W. Bush and 1355 for Al Gore. Many public officials decline to reveal their scores. Former New Jersey senator Bill Bradley (D), a Princeton University graduate and Rhodes Scholar, declined to comment on widespread reports during the 2000 primary election season that his verbal score on the SAT was 485. Verbal and math scores, each with a possible high of 800, are combined to get the overall SAT score. Because of a scoring readjustment, SAT scores before 1995 were somewhat lower for the same number of right answers.


.... the late Minnesota Sen. Paul D. Wellstone (D) had written in an article published in 2000. His SAT score reportedly was below 900.
Bad Scores Good Company washingtonpost.com

More proof of how inaccurate and just plain silly PC's cut and paste nonsense is. SAT scores have nothing to do with obtaining the Rhodes Scholarship. It is a two year scholarship that uses various criteria and awarded to students who are attending colleges and have a grade average for reference. Many students with 4.0 grade standings got into college with minimum SAT scores. There are other criteria as well, making it possible for a student to receive the scholarship with less than a spectacular grade point average. Indications of motivation and leadership are important criteria for the scholarship. The world "scholar" is used as a reference to a scholarship, not an indication of genius. The Rhodes Scholarship is prestigious and may indicate above average intelligence, but it certainly doesn't indicate high SAT scores and high SAT scores does not always indicate above average intelligence.

True, high scores may also be the result of parents paying a private agency to prepare the student for the test. Teaching to the test makes better scores, but has no more relationship to critical thinking then making a phone call by rote or opening up a combination lock of long use.

Curious...are you aware of who are the employees of those private agencies that prepare students for the exams at a cost?

Teachers. Public school teachers. Yes, those teachers that only care about the children are tutoring for extra money after 3 PM....as opposed to offering free tutoring after 3PM to all students...including those that cant afford off site tutoring.

Now, I know...."Why cant teachers have the right to make extra money when they are not in school?"

Not saying they cant.......but since their day ends at 3PM as opposed to the normal 5PM, why cant they tutor til 5 PM for free and THEN tutor after work hours for cash....you know....like normal people who work 8:30-5 and then work a night job for extra cash?

LOL, you biases cloud your thinking and you opinion isn't supported by evidence. Public School teachers may teach to the SAT test, since they do in the classroom everyday as part of every school's curriculum, and their pay is not equal to the challenges they face. That said, they have homework too.

Parents pay for individual, one on one, tutoring. My guess, University Grad Students are more likely than a public school teacher to provide that paid for service.

 

[Camp]

Sure it is. You just don't know how to compile it to form a usable or actionable reference unless someone else does it for you and you are able to cut a paste the results.

Bingo. PC is a regurgitator. She simply repeats. She doesn't actually understand most of what she's repeating. And when questioned about it, either cuts and pastes another source she doesn't understand. Or shuts down.

A xerox can do as much.

Wait....you retracted your post claiming how smart Clinton was.....a Rhodes Scholar???

Why did you remove it?

That post made my day! You're one of those imbeciles who believes that those awards that Liberals give each other are actually deserved!!!

Obama got the Nobel Prize for tying his shoelaces.

And Krugman!!!!


Watch how I prove.....not show, PROVE what a moron you are!




8. How about Rhodes Scholars.....being named such must mean one is really smart, huh?


"The two major-party presidential candidates in 2000 had above-average SAT scores: 1206 for George W. Bush and 1355 for Al Gore. Many public officials decline to reveal their scores. Former New Jersey senator Bill Bradley (D), a Princeton University graduate and Rhodes Scholar, declined to comment on widespread reports during the 2000 primary election season that his verbal score on the SAT was 485. Verbal and math scores, each with a possible high of 800, are combined to get the overall SAT score. Because of a scoring readjustment, SAT scores before 1995 were somewhat lower for the same number of right answers.


.... the late Minnesota Sen. Paul D. Wellstone (D) had written in an article published in 2000. His SAT score reportedly was below 900.
Bad Scores Good Company washingtonpost.com

More proof of how inaccurate and just plain silly PC's cut and paste nonsense is. SAT scores have nothing to do with obtaining the Rhodes Scholarship. It is a two year scholarship that uses various criteria and awarded to students who are attending colleges and have a grade average for reference. Many students with 4.0 grade standings got into college with minimum SAT scores. There are other criteria as well, making it possible for a student to receive the scholarship with less than a spectacular grade point average. Indications of motivation and leadership are important criteria for the scholarship. The world "scholar" is used as a reference to a scholarship, not an indication of genius. The Rhodes Scholarship is prestigious and may indicate above average intelligence, but it certainly doesn't indicate high SAT scores and high SAT scores does not always indicate above average intelligence.

True, high scores may also be the result of parents paying a private agency to prepare the student for the test. Teaching to the test makes better scores, but has no more relationship to critical thinking then making a phone call by rote or opening up a combination lock of long use.

Curious...are you aware of who are the employees of those private agencies that prepare students for the exams at a cost?

Teachers. Public school teachers. Yes, those teachers that only care about the children are tutoring for extra money after 3 PM....as opposed to offering free tutoring after 3PM to all students...including those that cant afford off site tutoring.

Now, I know...."Why cant teachers have the right to make extra money when they are not in school?"

Not saying they cant.......but since their day ends at 3PM as opposed to the normal 5PM, why cant they tutor til 5 PM for free and THEN tutor after work hours for cash....you know....like normal people who work 8:30-5 and then work a night job for extra cash?

My kid is with a teacher from 8:00 am to 3:00 pm and available for parent/teacher meetings after 3. Not sure how long they actually stay, but they are definitely there beyond about 3:30. Maybe it is different for teachers of older children.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Wait....you retracted your post claiming how smart Clinton was.....a Rhodes Scholar???

Why did you remove it?

I've made no such post. You're hallucinating.

Can I take it from your bizarre switch from your geriatric former admiral spouting off about topics he knows nothing about to hallucinations on 'how smart Clinton is', that this conversation didn't go the way you'd planned?

You're correct....it was Esmerelda.

I apologize for mistaking you for that one.

 

[mudwhistle]

PC, what makes the retired admiral an expert on islam?

Annapolis.....

That could make him an expert on a good many things... are you saying he studied islam at Annapolis?

If he got some of the classes I got ... yes.
Back before Obama, we studied anti-terrorism tactics. One of them is "Know Your Enemy".

If you can't identify your enemies then you'd better hang it up. You're defeated already.

 

[mudwhistle]

Ace stated the US Navy was taken over by homosexuals, that CIA Director John Brennan is a Muslim convert, that the Muslim Brotherhood will be a political party in next election among other bizarre things. The good Admiral is to be thanked and appreciated for his life long career serving his country. So sad right wing hacks are taking advantage of an American veteran for cash only. Those of us in the intel business know that the good Admiral has little to no credibility whatsoever in any intelligence analysis much less foreign affairs. Amazed anyone takes him seriously.

Yeah.......right.......

Brennan sounds like an idiot.
I can't believe anything he says.
Gays have taken over the Whitehouse, so it's not much of a stretch thinking the Navy has gone Ghey with all of the purging of senior officers going on.
The Muslim Brotherhood will have to change their name ... How bout Democrat Party??

 

[BluesLegend]

....conservatives attempt to identify all of Islamofascism as evil....

And to do that you and your Admiral are condemning all of Islam

Seriously, you're argument is we have to be so careful about what we say and how we say it because "all of Islam" is so stupid they might take it the wrong way? Realy all of them? That's pretty insulting but then that's textbook liberal elitist thinking for you.

Maybe you should read post #49

You're deflection is noted, and was expected.

Your response is the current meme of Crazy Right Wingers.

Do you make stuff up in your head that isn't true on a daily basis?

 

[BluesLegend]

If the Muslims and Islam is all sooo bad, why didn't the GOP take care of the problem while they were in power?

Did you sleep through the Democratic party and MSM's multi-year anti-war campaign against Bush?

Ah...it's the Democrats' fault that the Republicans didn't do their "job". Gotcha.

You and your ilk and by that I mean traitors turned the country against Bush and our troops with your anti-war propaganda campaign. The intentionally biased reporting was epic, did you notice how it stopped cold right after Obama was elected? We did.

 

[Where_r_my_Keys]

If the Muslims and Islam is all sooo bad, why didn't the GOP take care of the problem while they were in power?

Did you sleep through the Democratic party and MSM's multi-year anti-war campaign against Bush?

Ah...it's the Democrats' fault that the Republicans didn't do their "job". Gotcha.

You and your ilk and by that I mean traitors turned the country against Bush and our troops with your anti-war propaganda campaign. The intentionally biased reporting was epic, did you notice how it stopped cold right after Obama was elected? We did.

LOL! the Left doesn't have a problem with war, as you'll soon discover when they wage war on YOU.

Meaning that the Left was not protesting WAR... it was protesting American ideas prevailing through war.

As the Admiral pointed out in the OP. They're anti-American.

 

[JakeStarkey]

None of you corporatists better be attacking teachers for working after hours.

That's just pity partying and whining.

 

[JakeStarkey]

If the Muslims and Islam is all sooo bad, why didn't the GOP take care of the problem while they were in power?

Did you sleep through the Democratic party and MSM's multi-year anti-war campaign against Bush?

Ah...it's the Democrats' fault that the Republicans didn't do their "job". Gotcha.

You and your ilk and by that I mean traitors turned the country against Bush and our troops with your anti-war propaganda campaign. The intentionally biased reporting was epic, did you notice how it stopped cold right after Obama was elected? We did.

No, it did not. In what country do you live?

 

[Wry Catcher]

And to do that you and your Admiral are condemning all of Islam

Seriously, you're argument is we have to be so careful about what we say and how we say it because "all of Islam" is so stupid they might take it the wrong way? Realy all of them? That's pretty insulting but then that's textbook liberal elitist thinking for you.

Maybe you should read post #49

You're deflection is noted, and was expected.

Your response is the current meme of Crazy Right Wingers.

Do you make stuff up in your head that isn't true on a daily basis?

Your deflection is noted, and not unexpected.

 

[Where_r_my_Keys]

Seriously, you're argument is we have to be so careful about what we say and how we say it because "all of Islam" is so stupid they might take it the wrong way? Realy all of them? That's pretty insulting but then that's textbook liberal elitist thinking for you.

Maybe you should read post #49

You're deflection is noted, and was expected.

Your response is the current meme of Crazy Right Wingers.

Do you make stuff up in your head that isn't true on a daily basis?

Your deflection is noted, and not unexpected.

ROFLMNAO! I so adore the sweeter ironies...

 

[JakeStarkey]

Maybe you should read post #49

You're deflection is noted, and was expected.

Your response is the current meme of Crazy Right Wingers.

Do you make stuff up in your head that isn't true on a daily basis?

Your deflection is noted, and not unexpected.

ROFLMNAO! I so adore the sweeter ironies...

You should, since you were doing exactly that with TemplarKormac as he drove you from pillar to post.

That was an epic beating, the best in at least two years. He rodeoed you hard, little twink.

 

[BluesLegend]

Seriously, you're argument is we have to be so careful about what we say and how we say it because "all of Islam" is so stupid they might take it the wrong way? Realy all of them? That's pretty insulting but then that's textbook liberal elitist thinking for you.

Maybe you should read post #49

You're deflection is noted, and was expected.

Your response is the current meme of Crazy Right Wingers.

Do you make stuff up in your head that isn't true on a daily basis?

Your deflection is noted, and not unexpected.

You have been awarded 0 points for originality.

 

[Where_r_my_Keys]

ROFLMNAO! The Wry Catcher enjoys the undying support of FlakeSnarkey.