|
Post by SimSim on Jul 14, 2009 18:40:18 GMT -5
Very much so. Ignores the direct result of the Bush Admin's actions. But those happened in other countries, which don't count, because only what happens in the US matters.
|
|
|
Post by Tiger on Jul 14, 2009 18:43:35 GMT -5
I love Bush and Co's primary defence: "Not including the single worst terrorist attack on US soil, no more American white civilians were killed by external terrorists in the mainland and on the balance of things than the average presidency." Narrow much? Were they really that blatant about it?
|
|
|
Post by MaybeNever on Jul 14, 2009 18:46:51 GMT -5
The tapes with Osama's voice on them aren't conclusive he's alive. Didn't Tupac (or his estate, I guess) release another CD like two years ago?
|
|
|
Post by devilschaplain2 on Jul 14, 2009 19:06:19 GMT -5
The tapes with Osama's voice on them aren't conclusive he's alive. Didn't Tupac (or his estate, I guess) release another CD like two years ago? Not really the same thing. After musicians die they tend to have releases of recordings which weren't previously released. Hell they've done that with Nirvana. With bin Laden, he's been mentioning current events. If Tupac started doing that (like on Chappelle's Show) then they might be comparable.
|
|
|
Post by MaybeNever on Jul 14, 2009 19:11:16 GMT -5
I know, I know. I was just messing around. Still, that episode of South Park using old Chef sound clips after Isaac Hayes left comes to mind.
|
|
|
Post by Old Viking on Jul 14, 2009 19:45:17 GMT -5
Post hoc ergo propter hoc.
|
|
|
Post by ironbite on Jul 14, 2009 19:50:11 GMT -5
OH I SEE WHAT YOU DID WITH THE TITLE THERE!
|
|
|
Post by devilschaplain2 on Jul 14, 2009 20:09:36 GMT -5
I know, I know. I was just messing around. Still, that episode of South Park using old Chef sound clips after Isaac Hayes left comes to mind. Is that why Osama kept saying he wanted to make sweet love to George Bush on the last tape?
|
|
|
Post by dasfuchs on Jul 14, 2009 21:41:26 GMT -5
Oh boy! They pulled out my favorite argument ever. "With George W. Bush in office, we have not had another attack since 9/11/2001." Well, yeah, let's just totally ignore that the 9/11 attack did happen, and that the Bush Admin ignored intelligence report that stated Al Quida was determined to attack the US. So let's just totally ignore that there might have been a chance to prevent the attacks. Morons. Since Obama has been in office we haven't had even ONE terrorist attack in the USA, eat that shit conservative fuckwads
|
|
|
Post by MaybeNever on Jul 14, 2009 21:47:40 GMT -5
Since Obama has been in office we haven't had even ONE terrorist attack in the USA, eat that shit conservative fuckwads Just proof that he himself is a Muslim terrorist! They would never attack their own!
|
|
|
Post by dasfuchs on Jul 14, 2009 21:54:15 GMT -5
*reads through the letter and DC's awesome reply*
How the fuck can anyone think like this and consider themselves rational. Fuck, how can anyone think this way and believe it
|
|
|
Post by ironbite on Jul 14, 2009 21:57:54 GMT -5
The only thing I have a problem with is the fate of Bin Laden. Weather or not he's dead or alive, they might have a reason to conceal that information. A civil war within the group for control of the group if he is dead.
Ironbite-that'd be......well it'd be the the end of Al Qadea as we know it.
|
|
|
Post by Maryland Bear on Jul 15, 2009 6:40:02 GMT -5
DevilsChapain left out one key point in his rebuttal to the original post, which makes the standard right wing claim that Bill Clinton did nothing about bin Laden.
He did -- he launched missile attacks in an attempt to kill bin Laden after (I think) the attacks on US Embassies in Africa.
And what did the American right do? Support an attempt to remove a threat to the United States? Oh, no. They mocked Clinton for it. Claim he was trying to distract attention from the Lewinsky scandal. Keep bringing up that the missile attacks struck an aspirin factory. A few even implied bin Laden wasn't a big deal.
The 9/11 Commission even cited the right's response to those attacks as one of the reasons Clinton did not further pursue bin Laden.
Now, I'll admit, distracting attention from the Lewinsky probably did figure into the political calculus of launching the attacks. But that doesn't change the fact that Bill Clinton damn well did try to remove bin Laden, and the right wing pieces of filth that attacked ever fucking thing Clinton did opposed it.
|
|
|
Post by SimSim on Jul 15, 2009 8:38:11 GMT -5
He did -- he launched missile attacks in an attempt to kill bin Laden after (I think) the attacks on US Embassies in Africa. Yes, it was a response to the attacks on the US Embassies.
|
|
|
Post by dasfuchs on Jul 15, 2009 10:15:54 GMT -5
DevilsChapain left out one key point in his rebuttal to the original post, which makes the standard right wing claim that Bill Clinton did nothing about bin Laden. He did -- he launched missile attacks in an attempt to kill bin Laden after (I think) the attacks on US Embassies in Africa. And what did the American right do? Support an attempt to remove a threat to the United States? Oh, no. They mocked Clinton for it. Claim he was trying to distract attention from the Lewinsky scandal. Keep bringing up that the missile attacks struck an aspirin factory. A few even implied bin Laden wasn't a big deal. The 9/11 Commission even cited the right's response to those attacks as one of the reasons Clinton did not further pursue bin Laden. Now, I'll admit, distracting attention from the Lewinsky probably did figure into the political calculus of launching the attacks. But that doesn't change the fact that Bill Clinton damn well did try to remove bin Laden, and the right wing pieces of filth that attacked ever fucking thing Clinton did opposed it. That seems to be their response to everything not republican, even stuff that would benefit them, if a democrat thought, enacted, or made it work, republicans would refuse it and mock.
|
|