kmcguffee

http://slate.msn.com/id/2102723/ Nice points. "Any fool can criticize, condemn and complain and most fools do." Ben Franklin

Great post. This is very evident when traveling overseas where the BBC is one of the few channels you can get. CNN International isn't far behind the BBC in this regard. "Any fool can criticize, condemn and complain and most fools do." Ben Franklin

I don't listen to them. The ones I have listened to annoy me. They tend to be too extreme either left or right. I listen to music or language tapes. "Any fool can criticize, condemn and complain and most fools do." Ben Franklin

But, like I said, there is no evidence the official Saudi government is supporting terrrorism. There is a lot of pressure being put on Saudi Arabia to increase their anti-terrorism work. There is no reason to go to war with the government though. There are a lot of other countries that are "dragging their feet" in dealing with terrorism for fear of inciting their own extremist Muslim population. If you are trying to use this as a basis to go to war with them then we could also go to war with Lebanon, Syria, Iran, North Korea, Venezuela, Malaysia, Pakistan, Yemen, Sudan, etc. The list goes on. Didn't we try using that pressure with at least one country? Which one was it?..................................oh yeah! It was Iraq. Seems the outpouring of sympathy had no real tears behind it. You want us to give money to the government of Sudan? I'm sure it will be used for its intended purpose just like Saddam used his. http://abcnews.go.com/sections/WNT/Investigation/oil_for_food_ripoff_040420-1.html Of course we had the UN helping make sure it went to the right place in Iraq. That turned out well. BTW, Iraq DID engage in the development of WMD's and DID have ties with Al Qaida. Iraq's Nuclear program: http://www.nci.org/iraq/iraq511.htm http://nuclearweaponarchive.org/Iraq/IraqRefs.html Iraq's chemical weapons program: http://www.globalsecurity.org/wmd/world/iraq/cw-unscom.htm http://www.cnn.com/SPECIALS/2001/trade.center/biochem.weapons/ Al Qaida ties 9/11 commission: http://frankwarner.typepad.com/free_frank_warner/2004/06/contrary_to_som.html other sources: http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/003/527uwabl.asp "Any fool can criticize, condemn and complain and most fools do." Ben Franklin

There is no evidence to show that Saudi Arabia, as a government, is supporting terrorism. Iraq, as an entire government, was supporting terrorism. Saudi has certain individuals in their government that may support terrorism but the government doesn't as a whole. Hell, we have individuals in the U.S. government that support terrorism. So does Pakistan, Malaysia, Canada, France, Germany, etc. There is a big difference. The media and the liberals are trying to confuse people for political gain. Meanwhile, they are undermining every effort the U.S. makes to stop terrorism. "Any fool can criticize, condemn and complain and most fools do." Ben Franklin

We've been planning to invade North Korea since the 1950's. We had plans to go to war with the USSR for 40-50 years. We have plans on what we will do if we have to go to war with China. If we eventually have to conduct any of these wars will that make them illigitimate in your eyes? The military constantly tries to forecast the next conflict and try to be prepared for it. That is how they figure out their training, equipment, readiness posture, etc. We didn't have a plan for 19 lunatics to hijack four planes and crash them into three large buildings before it happened. I'm assuming, based on your dislike of war preparation, that makes our response legitimate. "Any fool can criticize, condemn and complain and most fools do." Ben Franklin

The panel didn't find "no credible link between Al-Qaida and Iraq". They found no credible link between Iraq and the attacks on 9/11. The media is distorting this finding. Take for example the MSNBC headline "9/11 commission: No link between bin Laden and Saddam" found here http://msnbc.msn.com/id/5228545. The commission never said there was no link between UBL and Saddam. If you read through the article this is what the commissioner actually said: "CHRIS MATTHEWS, HOST: This is a development a lot of people will find clarifying is that there was no direct connection between Saddam Hussein and 9/11. " Notice the word "9/11" not "Iraq"? Here was Thomas Kean's answer: "THOMAS KEAN, 9/11 COMMISSION CHAIRMAN: Well, that's what our staff has found. Now, it doesn't mean there weren't al Qaeda connections with Iraq over the years. They're somewhat shadowy, but I think they were there. But with 9/11, no, our staff has found no evidence of that." Yeah, there is no Liberal media bias. "Any fool can criticize, condemn and complain and most fools do." Ben Franklin

It's about sacrifice, a concept a large number of Americans have a hard time with. It's too bad the terrorists aren't having a hard time with it. "Any fool can criticize, condemn and complain and most fools do." Ben Franklin

And the liberal part of the country has fought with everything they have to prevent us from doing something about terrorism this time. They want something done about terrorism but God forbid they have to sacrifice something in the effort. If you are looking at political survivability, Clinton had the right tactic. Do something small, make it look like you are making an effort, then divert the American people's attention to something else. Increased security? Sure that sounds good. Oh.....you mean we have to stand in line at the airport longer? That's bullshit! Everyone should know that I'm not a terrorist. Tighter controls on explosives? Yeah we need that! Wait.....I can't play with the types of model rockets I want? Don't you see the ivory tower I live in? I'm not a terrorist! The terrorists don't have to defeat our military. Every bullet they fire at our soldiers is aimed directly at the will of the American people. That will is crumbling fast. My prediction is that they will eventually get what they want. We'll pull out of the Middle East and declare it a victory. Then they'll want more. "Any fool can criticize, condemn and complain and most fools do." Ben Franklin

Great! Now we're going to see the rise of the Donald Duck Martyrs Brigade. We'll see many soldiers die due to this inhumane torture and violation of the duck's basic rights. Was this eviction voted on by the U.N.? I'll bet this tragedy goes all the way to the top of the chain of command!

Liberals can serve in the military and Federal Law Enforcement. Apparently they're too scared to. My statement makes as much sense as yours. Different jobs attract different types of people. It has nothing to do with intelligence or exposure to the "truth". The bottom line is that public opinion is being shaped by a media that is increasingly liberally biased. The media is increasingly viewed with suspicion by the American people because of this. "Any fool can criticize, condemn and complain and most fools do." Ben Franklin

By civilian, do you mean non-military jobs? Because, if you mean non-military then the answer is "yes", I've already volunteered but I'm not exactly a civilian. I would be armed and working for the government. I would not work there unarmed. "Any fool can criticize, condemn and complain and most fools do." Ben Franklin

Gawain, they need to post this statement as a sticky. It seems you have to reiterate this fact often. "Any fool can criticize, condemn and complain and most fools do." Ben Franklin

You guys really do try to blame us for everything don't you? I always thought it was an exaggeration. "Any fool can criticize, condemn and complain and most fools do." Ben Franklin

What about Germany and Italy? They didn't attack us before we invaded them back in WWII. Pearl Harbor was an attack on the US by Japan. Remember the Mexican-American War in 1846-1848? The US did the invading during that war without being attacked by Mexico. We attacked because Texas wanted to secede (they considered themselves a Republic at the start) and Mexico didn't want to let it (Mexico considered Texas a rebellious territory). According to Mexico, Texas was still a part of Mexico at the time of the war. We eventually invaded Mexico after attacking the Mexican Army in disputed areas along the border. In WWI, the Germans only accidentally killed US citizens riding on other country's ships. They sent a few saboteurs to the US that did less damage than 90% of the terrorist attacks on the US have done. We invaded Grenada because they had a rebellion and changed to a Marxist government that we didn't like. They didn't attack us. We used the excuse of saving the stranded college students but that wasn't the real reason. BTW - Europe whined big time about this invasion also. That's the ones I can think up for now. I'm sure there are others. "Any fool can criticize, condemn and complain and most fools do." Ben Franklin

But.............you just did. You've lost me on your reasoning. You're comparing two conflicts in two different decades that, according to you, were both part of the "War on Communism". I don't see how that disproves my original point that Iraq and Afghanistan are separate conflicts in the same "War on Terror". "Any fool can criticize, condemn and complain and most fools do." Ben Franklin

They were a sovereign state that supported terrorism. Afghanistan was a sovereign state that supported terrorism. See the similarity? Well, they are the ones that I was referring to. "Any fool can criticize, condemn and complain and most fools do." Ben Franklin

The only rape mentioned in that report was one prisoner raping another prisoner. Other allegations of rape were made by prisoners. There is, as of yet, no proof that anyone raped a detainee. The exact part is: There is mention that detainees claim they were threatened with rape. One MP is accused of having sex with a female detainee: but no rape. Did you not read it or do you just like to make things look worse than they already are for other reasons? "Any fool can criticize, condemn and complain and most fools do." Ben Franklin

The objectives haven't changed. Here they are from an article published March 22, 2003: Link here: http://www.cnsnews.com/ViewPentagon.asp?Page=\Pentagon\archive\200303\PEN20030322e.html How has that got anything to do with what I said? During WWII we fought several different conflicts but they were all part of the same war. We fought in the Pacific, the Mediteranean, and in Europe all while maintaining heightened security in the US against domestic attacks. It was all one large war effort with multiple theaters and conflicts. In fact, we actually invaded and occupied two countries that never attacked us. Care to guess which two that was? "Any fool can criticize, condemn and complain and most fools do." Ben Franklin

Same war but different conflicts. They are both part of the overall "war on terror". Some are and some are not. There are foreign fighters in Iraq who profess to be members of terrorist groups. They are terrorists. I'm sure you'll require me to provide sources. Here are a few: http://www.globalsecurity.org/wmd/library/news/iraq/2003/11/iraq-031103-irna01.htm http://cnews.canoe.ca/CNEWS/World/Iraq/2003/11/02/244886-ap.html http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/iraq/2003-08-19-terror-trademarks_x.htm I left out statements by the Bush administration or the US Army because I'm sure everyone would claim they are lying. All of the above links are from Middle Eastern leaders or non-government groups. "Any fool can criticize, condemn and complain and most fools do." Ben Franklin

And A LOT of folks are so blinded by this idiot's rhetoric that they can't call an idiot an idiot. Everyone seems to be scared to death to be accused of not being PC. Moore is a fat lazy slob who is doing nothing but presenting bullshit with no factual basis in order to make money. He is doing nothing for this country, he is trying to impede the US in stopping the terrorist threat, and he is offering no alternative solution. He is on the side of the terrorists whether he realizes it or not. I'm assuming your inability to understand the Patriot Act is because of all of the grey you are seeing? No, it's because you are listening to idiots like Moore and the ACLU who don't take the terrorist threat seriously. They are willing to see the US fail, and possibly be destroyed, rather than see their liberal agendas left behind. It's pathetic and makes me disgusted. America has forgotten what it takes win a tough war. The terrorists haven't. Read about what they are willing to endure in order to have a chance to die trying to destroy America. Moore would be unfit to fight in their ranks. They would send him back if we tried to give him to them. Now how about you write about the topic instead of attacking the writer's ability to see "shades of grey". Isn't that one of the forum rules? "Any fool can criticize, condemn and complain and most fools do." Ben Franklin

I say we send his fat ass to Iraq and let him fight with the terrorists that he seems to love so much. That should get him some good publicity and give him a chance to really get back at Bush since he hates him so much. "Any fool can criticize, condemn and complain and most fools do." Ben Franklin

All of the ones I looked at were concerning Pen Registers and Trap and Trace requirements. Neither one of those are "tapping" phones. You only get numbers called not conversations. This is the language from the Patriot Act concerning intercepting oral communications: I think you can see that these are just adding violations where interception of oral communications is allowed. There is no reduction in the amount of proof of criminal conduct required. Here is a link to Section 2516(1) of Title 18 USC where it tells who may authorize a "wiretap": http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/18/2516.html. It says they may authorize a wiretap Here is a link to section 2518: http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/18/2518.html where it gives the requirement for a wiretap as Pen registers and trap and traces have never required "probable cause" to obtain. The threshold was not lowered for wiretaps, only new violations added where wiretapping was available as a tool. People against the Patriot Act, for whatever reason, are deliberately loose with their language in order to scare people. A Pen Register nor a Trap and Trace intercept any communications but some people like to insinuate that they do in order to scare you. Here is a link to the Patriot Act if you would care to read it: It also makes it possible to conduct proceedings for International Terrorism suspects, located in the US, in the FISA court instead of open court. This does not apply to domestic terrorism suspects (IOW it wouldn't have applied to the Oklahoma City bombers but would have to the 9/11 Hijackers). There is no reduction in the threshold for wiretaps anywhere in the Patriot Act. "Any fool can criticize, condemn and complain and most fools do." Ben Franklin

Explain what authority allows this please. "Any fool can criticize, condemn and complain and most fools do." Ben Franklin

That would be a mighty tenuous venture. The height of the Arabic language and Arabic culture was brought about by................invasion and occupation. Read about the rise of Arabic culture inthe 7th through 9th centuries. What about Germany and Japan during the 20th century? The many areas occupied by The Roman Empire? Numerous countries occupied by the British made drastic improvements during the occupation. I think you would have a hard time with that argument. There are a lot of examples either way. "Any fool can criticize, condemn and complain and most fools do." Ben Franklin