Muslims

[Care4all]

WHERE is this information? Not a single link in this thread supports the allegation. THAT would be logic.

Arguing that irrelevant factoids and illogical conclusions support an allegations is STUPID.

While there may be people smarter than me on this board, it isn't anyone currently participating in THIS thread and damned sure ain't YOUR dumber-n-a-htichpost ass.

the personal insults you continually throw at me are unbecoming and not a trait of a good moderator.... though i'm sure you think you're ''cool''.

and nor do they make you look any smarter or wiser, on the contrary, they make you appear childlike and foolish.

have a good night,

care

 

[Superlative]

This was WRITTEN, by Cheney, or a speech writer, on purpose, with key words repeated, its PROPAGANDA


This was ONE speech. and it wasnt even all of it.

Im gonna post it again cause I dont think you read it.


The danger to America requires action on many fronts all at once. We are reorganizing the federal government to protect the nation against further attack. The new Department of Homeland Security will gather under one roof the capability to identify threats, to check them against our vulnerabilities, and to move swiftly to protect the nation.

At the same time, we realize that wars are never won on the defensive. We must take the battle to the enemy. We will take every step necessary to make sure our country is secure, and we will prevail.

Much has happened since the attacks of 9/11. But as Secretary Rumsfeld has put it, we are still closer to the beginning of this war than we are to its end. The United States has entered a struggle of years -- a new kind of war against a new kind of enemy. The terrorists who struck America are ruthless, they are resourceful, and they hide in many countries. They came into our country to murder thousands of innocent men, women, and children. There is no doubt they wish to strike again, and that they are working to acquire the deadliest of all weapons.

Against such enemies, America and the civilized world have only one option: wherever terrorists operate, we must find them where they dwell, stop them in their planning, and one by one bring them to justice.

In Afghanistan, the Taliban regime and al Qaeda terrorists have met the fate they chose for themselves. And they saw, up-close and personal, the new methods and capabilities of America's armed services. (Applause.) May I say, as a former Secretary of Defense, that I have never been more proud of the America's military..............

.....In this war we've assembled a broad coalition of civilized nations that recognize the danger and are working with us on all fronts. The President has made very clear that there is no neutral ground in the fight against terror. Those who harbor terrorists share guilt for the acts they commit. Under the Bush Doctrine, a regime that harbors or supports terrorists will be regarded as hostile to the United States.

The Taliban has already learned that lesson, but Afghanistan was only the beginning of a lengthy campaign. Were we to stop now, any sense of security we might have would be false and temporary. There is a terrorist underworld out there, spread among more than 60 countries. The job we have will require every tool at our means of diplomacy, of finance, of intelligence, of law enforcement, and of military power. But we will, over time, find and defeat the enemies of the United States. In the case of Osama bin Laden -- as President Bush said recently -- "If he's alive, we'll get him. If he's not alive -- we already got him."

But the challenges to our country involve more than just tracking down a single person or one small group. Nine-eleven and its aftermath awakened this nation to danger, to the true ambitions of the global terror network, and to the reality that weapons of mass destruction are being sought by determined enemies who would not hesitate to use them against us.

It is a certainty that the al Qaeda network is pursuing such weapons, and has succeeded in acquiring at least a crude capability to use them. We found evidence of their efforts in the ruins of al Qaeda hideouts in Afghanistan. And we've seen in recent days additional confirmation in videos recently shown on CNN -- pictures of al Qaeda members training to commit acts of terror, and testing chemical weapons on dogs. Those terrorists who remain at large are determined to use these capabilities against the United States and our friends and allies around the world.

As we face this prospect, old doctrines of security do not apply. In the days of the Cold War, we were able to manage the threat with strategies of deterrence and containment. But it's a lot tougher to deter enemies who have no country to defend. And containment is not possible when dictators obtain weapons of mass destruction, and are prepared to share them with terrorists who intend to inflict catastrophic casualties on the United States.

http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/relea.../20020826.html


Repeat this 1000 times and there is your 70 % of the population that believes what was repeated.

 

[Gunny]

If I read your paragraph to a 20 year old 10 times, those words are what they would remember.
This is what people did remember after reading and hearing the same thing over and over and over.

How is that hard for you to get?

its Propaganda, plain and simple.

And Rumsfeld, Cheney, Wolfowitz, and Bush knew very well what they were saying, when they had thier speech writers craft those specific words, Or else they would have used other words, not those SPECIFIC words REPEATEDLY.

You say something enough and people only hear what you reapeat.

So, you're saying YOU were brainwashed? Because I read the SAME news, heard the same news, all the same speeches .... I didn't come away thinking that.

And to use an analogy I used earlier ... if I say "dick," "suck," and "you" over and over again, when a poll askes if you suck dick you're going to say yes? Why do I doubt that seriously?

I must admit though, I have never seen such a concernted effort as this thread to justify a lie with a complete lack of logic, common sense, and/or fact since I first posted on a political message board.

Because THOSE are your two choices. You're with just plain-old dumb, or you're lying. It doesn't get simpler than THAT.

 

[Truthmatters]

Maybe you were not one that made up the 70% but there were still very near that number in many polls at the time

 

[Gunny]

the personal insults you continually throw at me are unbecoming and not a trait of a good moderator.... though i'm sure you think you're ''cool''.

and nor do they make you look any smarter or wiser, on the contrary, they make you appear childlike and foolish.

have a good night,

care

I respond in kind, but I was just WAITING for you to toss in the "not a good trait of a moderator card." Goes right along with the rest of your BS accusations.

Your condescending, wannabe intellectually elite veiled insults are no less insults, and your one-sided, ignorant viewpoints are a direct reflection on your intelligence.

Plain and simple ... when YOU quit insulting me and my intelligence, I'll be more than happy to quit insulting you in return. Either way, your opinion of me rates right up there with Nancy Pelosi's opinion of me.

Who cares?

 

[Gunny]

Gunny we attacked a country who didnt have anything to dowith 911 they just let AQ opperate in their borders.

This country was Afganistan.

I agreed with that action.

Whereas members of al-Qaida, an organization bearing responsibility for attacks on the United States, its citizens, and interests, including the attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001, are known to be in Iraq;

This was not verified when we attacked Iraq for the same reasons

The al Qaeda that is in Iraq is NOT the al Qaeda that orcehstrated 9/11.

WHERE do you come up with this stuff.

 

[Truthmatters]

http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2002/10/20021007-8.html

 

[Superlative]

So, you're saying YOU were brainwashed? Because I read the SAME news, heard the same news, all the same speeches .... I didn't come away thinking that.

And to use an analogy I used earlier ... if I say "dick," "suck," and "you" over and over again, when a poll askes if you suck dick you're going to say yes? Why do I doubt that seriously?

Not the same and you know it. How about if I repeatedly said "dicks" and "Brazillians" and "monkey" and "eat"

I bet in a few months you would think all Brazillians eat monkey dicks, cause you wouldnt know any better. cause most people have never been to Brazil. much like the middle east.

I must admit though, I have never seen such a concernted effort as this thread to justify a lie with a complete lack of logic, common sense, and/or fact since I first posted on a political message board.

How is the use of repetition considered a lock of logic? Im in advertising, and its one of the main principals of getting people to buy something.

Its proven. Why do you think America is FULL of consumers?

Because THOSE are your two choices. You're with just plain-old dumb, or you're lying. It doesn't get simpler than THAT.

I guess I was with you, a part of the 30% that didnt believe the propaganda.



People are smart, Ill give you that, INDIVIDUALLY, a person is very reasonable, I could give all the facts to one person and they would come to their own conclusion,

BUT when you tell them all the same thing and there is no difference in the information, and no one to disagree, they will believe what they are told.

plain and simple.

 

[Truthmatters]

We know that Iraq and the al Qaeda terrorist network share a common enemy -- the United States of America. We know that Iraq and al Qaeda have had high-level contacts that go back a decade. Some al Qaeda leaders who fled Afghanistan went to Iraq. These include one very senior al Qaeda leader who received medical treatment in Baghdad this year, and who has been associated with planning for chemical and biological attacks. We've learned that Iraq has trained al Qaeda members in bomb-making and poisons and deadly gases. And we know that after September the 11th, Saddam Hussein's regime gleefully celebrated the terrorist attacks on America.

Iraq could decide on any given day to provide a biological or chemical weapon to a terrorist group or individual terrorists. Alliance with terrorists could allow the Iraqi regime to attack America without leaving any fingerprints.

Some have argued that confronting the threat from Iraq could detract from the war against terror. To the contrary; confronting the threat posed by Iraq is crucial to winning the war on terror. When I spoke to Congress more than a year ago, I said that those who harbor terrorists are as guilty as the terrorists themselves. Saddam Hussein is harboring terrorists and the instruments of terror, the instruments of mass death and destruction. And he cannot be trusted. The risk is simply too great that he will use them, or provide them to a terror network.

 

[Truthmatters]

The al Qaeda that is in Iraq is NOT the al Qaeda that orcehstrated 9/11.

WHERE do you come up with this stuff.

Whereas members of al-Qaida, an organization bearing responsibility for attacks on the United States, its citizens, and interests, including the attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001, are known to be in Iraq

This is a quote from Bush , I have given it many times and you still dont recognise it?

Please at least read what people write before you just dismiss their arguement.

Please

 

[Gunny]

I guess I was with you, a part of the 30% that didnt believe the propaganda.



People are smart, Ill give you that, INDIVIDUALLY, a person is very reasonable, I could give all the facts to one person and they would come to their own conclusion,

BUT when you tell them all the same thing and there is no difference in the information, and no one to disagree, they will believe what they are told.

plain and simple.

What I honestly see here? An uninformed, uneducated to the topic, propaganda believing liberal making a baseless argument getting his ass handed to him right and left, and other liberal members feeling obligated to defend him.

Because quite simply, I don't believe you or Maineman believe this crap for a minute, unless I have sorely misjudged you. We may not agree on everything, but I at least can respect that you two make informed, educated arguments.

This thread is almost 30 pages long, and the best anyone can do is suggest brainwashing as a means of Bush tying Saddam to 9/11. No real facts nor evidence to support the allegation otherwise.

Yet it keeps getting dragged on and on.

 

[Gunny]

Whereas members of al-Qaida, an organization bearing responsibility for attacks on the United States, its citizens, and interests, including the attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001, are known to be in Iraq

This is a quote from Bush , I have given it many times and you still dont recognise it?

Please at least read what people write before you just dismiss their arguement.

Please

There were members of al Qaeda in Iraq. They had a training camp in the Northern No-Fly Zone, an area off-limits to Saddam Hussein and his army. Any connection between Zarqawi/AQ and Saddam is tenuous at best.

The statement is factually correct. It however implies a relationship that has never been proven.

 

[Superlative]

What I honestly see here? An uninformed, uneducated to the topic, propaganda believing liberal making a baseless argument getting his ass handed to him right and left, and other liberal members feeling obligated to defend him.

Because quite simply, I don't believe you or Maineman believe this crap for a minute, unless I have sorely misjudged you. We may not agree on everything, but I at least can respect that you two make informed, educated arguments.

This thread is almost 30 pages long, and the best anyone can do is suggest brainwashing as a means of Bush tying Saddam to 9/11. No real facts nor evidence to support the allegation otherwise.

Yet it keeps getting dragged on and on.

Seeing as this is the second time you have addressed me directly in this thread, I dont see how anyone is defending me from you.
If you consider YOU sitting there saying "NO, NO, NO, I dont believe you!" as me getting served, I find that amusing.

Saddam - 9/11 argument is a suggestion Gunny, and a Viable one at that.

I suggest this based on a provable history of Propaganda, and a knowledge of Advertising.



You have done NOTHING to dispute the fact that repeating the same words over and over CAN DOES AND WILL make people believe one thing or another.

If you believe in the existance of Propaganda, the very theory of it.
Then you must concede the viable explanation that the government, conciously repeating the same words in a grouping, manipulated the populous to believe, even subconciously that Saddam was somehow linked to 9/11.

 

[Care4all]

*sigh* Don't make me do it again...

what are you a wannabee moderator or the rep police? lol

 

[red states rule]

Seeing as this is the second time you have addressed me directly in this thread, I dont see how anyone is defending me from you.
If you consider YOU sitting there saying "NO, NO, NO, I dont believe you!" as me getting served, I find that amusing.

Saddam - 9/11 argument is a suggestion Gunny, and a Viable one at that.

I suggest this based on a provable history of Propaganda, and a knowledge of Advertising.



You have done NOTHING to dispute the fact that repeating the same words over and over CAN DOES AND WILL make people believe one thing or another.

If you believe in the existance of Propaganda the very theory of it.
Then you must concede the viable explanation that the government in the form of repetition of the same words in a grouping, manipulated the populous into believe, even subconciously that Saddam was somehow linked to 9/11.

We know most on the left are appeasers and they blame Amercia first

Your point has been made - we get it

 

[Gunny]

Seeing as this is the second time you have addressed me directly in this thread, I dont see how anyone is defending me from you.
If you consider YOU sitting there saying "NO, NO, NO, I dont believe you!" as me getting served, I find that amusing.

Hardly. I felt the need to differnetiate between you and someone else. I could lump y'all together instead. That would be right, wouldn't it?

Saddam - 9/11 argument is a suggestion Gunny, and a Viable one at that.

Only for those looking for an excuse to point yet another finger at Bush. In reality, it is not viable at all.l

I suggest this based on a provable history of Propaganda, and a knowledge of Advertising.

You have done NOTHING to dispute the fact that repeating the same words over and over CAN DOES AND WILL make people believe one thing or another.

I cannot dispute with fact something that does not exist, and has YET TO BE proven. NOTHING from Page One to this page supports the allegation except speculation and drawing far-fetched conclusions comparing apples and oranges.

Claiming I have not disputed THAT is a bit less than honest since the burden of proof is not on me to begin with.

If you believe in the existance of Propaganda the very theory of it.
Then you must concede the viable explanation that the government in the form of repetition of the same words in a grouping, manipulated the populous into believe, even subconciously that Saddam was somehow linked to 9/11.

Now you're trying to take it a step further out into the cosmos. The former does not necessitate the existence of the latter.

It's possible for me to be elected President too ...

 

[Care4all]

There were members of al Qaeda in Iraq. They had a training camp in the Northern No-Fly Zone, an area off-limits to Saddam Hussein and his army. Any connection between Zarqawi/AQ and Saddam is tenuous at best.

The statement is factually correct. It however implies a relationship that has never been proven.

BINGO!

 

[red states rule]

BINGO!

So?

 

[Care4all]

I never once remember Saddam being blamed for 9/11... He was accused of Providing a safe haven and breading ground for AQ... And that proved to be true.

That is simply not true Alucard....it was NOT proven that Saddam offered a safe haven and breeding ground for AQ.

 

[red states rule]

That is simply not true Alucard....it was NOT proven that Saddam offered a safe haven and breeding ground for AQ.

Try again

Traing camps in Iraq, and meetings with Saddams secrect police with AQ

Saddam was a terrorist himself