quote:

Originally posted by thormachine:
hey pterran!!
thats great!! did you JUST figure that out?? WOW!! if only i had known that...then i wouldnt have gone on all this time thinking that this was a forum where opposing ideas could be given to each other and mulled over!!

silly me.....

cmon, dude.....that is really stupid....

and btw i will never give airjesse a break....i dont give people breaks when they spew crap at me.

1) does that matter?
2) ILL GET ON THE PHONE RIGHT NOW!!! oh wait no i wont because that would be really stupid and no one there would care that i said that comment....and it isnt slander to incorporate previous works of art in your own works.....as Mr. Dark will tell you in his oh so contradictory way....it is perfectly normal for such things to happen!

[This message has been edited by thormachine (edited 08-07-2004).]

Thormachine,

What ARE you talking about? Seriously. Take a look at this post and please tell me what this is about. Yeah, you gotta make it simple for me because I'm a simple kinda guy. But surely you'll admit this doesn't make much sense.

Best,

Pete

"A baby with its guts blown off is a baby with its guts blown off, no matter how much editing is done. Sorry, dude."

Indeed, it is. So a baby with its guts blown off is a baby with its guts blown off whether or not it is brought to the attention of the media right? Bush seems to be taking Saddam's heat. I'm not a Bush supporter, but I have to take his side on this one. You have to realize the the Hussein regime was full of sadistic and cruel people. Sorry to tell you, but this was happening before we got there and it was probably a lot worse before we removed Saddam from power.


And although I don't take a particular liking to Bill O'reilly, I have to agree with him on the WMD "lie." Bush did not lie to us about WMD's if that's what you were referring to when you spoke of Bush's "lie". Let's define lie here. "an assertion of something known or believed by the speaker to be untrue with intent to deceive" Bush believed that it was true. He had three different inteligence agencies that told him that there were WMD's there.

Translator,

Only two points to make:

1.) There was no article not to change because there was no article to rewrite. It was a letter to the editor. Hardly a factual piece. And while the layout of the page was altered for effect, the headline wasn�t. But since the headline referred to a letter � and, thus, an opinion piece, Moore�s desired effect was achieved: He wanted you to think there was an article that asserted that Bush lost the recount. So he was misleading at best. And his overall assertion that Gore won most recounts IS a lie. Gore won in only one of the recounts. In all others, he lost.

2.) Though you assert people like Bush less because of F-9/11, there�s no evidence to support F-9/11 has changed the minds of enough people to affect the election, which was Moore�s stated goal. Though the movies box office success cannot be disputed, the analysis I�ve seen shows its playing, and re-playing, to the choir, and only managing to galvanize both sides of the political spectrum.

Best,

Pete

quote:

Originally posted by John Galt:

Indeed, it is. So a baby with its guts blown off is a baby with its guts blown off whether or not it is brought to the attention of the media right? Bush seems to be taking Saddam's heat. I'm not a Bush supporter, but I have to take his side on this one. You have to realize the the Hussein regime was full of sadistic and cruel people. Sorry to tell you, but this was happening before we got there and it was probably a lot worse before we removed Saddam from power.

The death that we have created (between about 11000 and 13000 civilian casualties) in Iraq is pretty damn bad when compared to what went on before...and if we are going with the fact that it was a terrible regime....what about all those other "terrible" regimes around the world? why didnt we depose Kim Jong-Il and his weapons program?

When it comes right down to it Bush wasnt just sitting around wondering what good he could do in the world and then 3 intelligence agencies came foreward and told him how terrible Iraq was and how many WMD's Saddam had. He and his administration were looking for a reason to go to war with Iraq since their first meeting....(read The Price of Loyalty by Ron Suskind [the story of Paul O' Neill the former Treasury Secretary of the Bush administration])....

and pterran....im using something called sarcasm to make fun of your "revelation" about our arguement....you really cant see that?

thor,
Where did you get 11000 civilian casualties? The Coalition casualty rate has just reached 1000... why? BECAUSE IT IS A WAR! Maybe 11000 of the enemy militia has been killed, and I am glad about that... less of them to take the fight to our doorstep.

Also, read the 9/11 commission report, which I am sure you would agree is fair and balanced, it explicitely says the Bush admin. did not pressure the intelligence community to report WMDS.

-J

[This message has been edited by airjesse123 (edited 08-08-2004).]

quote:

Originally posted by airjesse123:
thor,
Where did you get 11000 civilian casualties? The Coalition casualty rate has just reached 1000... why? BECAUSE IT IS A WAR! Maybe 11000 of the enemy milita has been killed, and I am glad about that... less of them to take the fight to our doorstep.

Also, read the 9/11 commission report, which I am sure you would agree is fair and balanced, it explicitely says the Bush admin. did not pressure the intelligence community to report WMDS.

-J

enemy militia?.....ENEMY MILITIA!?!?!!? KIDS YOU IDIOT!!!! a good amount of them are kids!! stop wishing the death of thousands for the neocon goals of taking over the world!!! i cant take this anymore....i got that number from www.iraqbodycount.org
check it out....and dont you dare say that it is biased liberal media....look at how they collect data...then sit down and shut up....

Thats not what sources in the administration have to say about the Bush administration....

Must resist. . .

ARGGGGGHHHH!

Thormachine: You are happy to cite sources that support your view, but ignore those that support the Bush administration's view. I've been reading sources on both sides of these issues. It is simply not as simple as you try to make it out to be.

Also, while I agree that whatever the figure is (11,000 - 13,000 casualities in the Iraqi war), there are some innocent civilians harmed and killed in that number . . . and it is a tragedy. But the number of mass graves and reported murders in the Hussein regime number up to 300,000 (yes, that's three hundred thousand) -- most of whom were innocents. This does not include the deaths caused by his invasion of Iran, his invasion of Kuwait, and his slaughter of the Kurds with poisonous gas.

The hope, at the end of this war, is for a freer and stable Iraq. Our benefit is not going to be Iraq's oil, it will (hopefully) be a more stable middle east, and a more free region. The end hope of Hussein's work was personal power and murder.

I'm struggling to see why this dichotomy fails to impress you.

Additionally, did you really write this:

"stop wishing the death of thousands for the neocon goals of taking over the world!!!".

This is simply bizarre. Show me the last time America has retained "conquered" land since the Mexican-American war.




[This message has been edited by Mr. Dark (edited 08-08-2004).]

quote:

FROM Iraqi Body Count:
"Does your count include deaths from indirect causes?"

Each side can readily claim that indirectly-caused deaths are the "fault" of the other side or, where long-term illnesses and genetic disorders are concerned, "due to other causes." Our methodology requires that specific deaths attributed to US-led military actions are carried in at least two reports from our approved sources. This includes deaths resulting from the destruction of water treatment plants or any other lethal effects on the civilian population. The test for us remains whether the bullet (or equivalent) is attributed to a piece of weaponry where the trigger was pulled by a US or allied finger, or is due to "collateral damage" by either side (with the burden of responsibility falling squarely on the shoulders of those who initiate war without UN Security Council authorization). We agree that deaths from any deliberate source are an equal outrage, but in this project we want to only record those deaths to which we can unambiguously hold our own leaders to account. In short, we record all civilians deaths attributed to our military intervention in Iraq.

So, these deaths are ALL deaths recorded as a result of OUR military actions. Well, did you know that Paul Johnson was killed by an enemy force... I am sure you did... and do you know the reason that the enemy militia gave for the atrocity, it was because American Forces were in Iraq. By the logic of the site IraqiBodyCount.com, Johnson's death is a result of American intervention. This is ludacris reasoning to the common man, but following a chain of logic, it is not too far fetched. Also, lets put things in perspective, how bout vietnam, because as we all know iraq is just like vietnam!!! Civilians Killed, Vietnamese: 2,000,000 *
Civilians Killed, Allied: 1,000 (est.) OK!!

According to the Senate investigation, Lord Butler's British investigation and Vladimir Putin, the intelligence assessments on Iraqi WMDs all said Saddam had them. AND ALSO ACCORDING TO ALL THERE WAS NO COERCION! Not to mention the 9-11 commission saying "ditto" to those claims.


-j


[This message has been edited by airjesse123 (edited 08-08-2004).]

[This message has been edited by airjesse123 (edited 08-08-2004).]

quote:

Originally posted by Translator:
John Galt,
much better; Moore appears to have doctored the evidence a bit.
Thor, Moore is not a saint, and shouldn't be considered as one. He too has an agenda. He too may use half-truths. I have to stand by John this time, despite my dislike of just about everything he says.

John, Moore does lie sometimes. That was always known. But while his lies are made to save lives of Americans and the general world publick, Bush's lies are made to do the otherwise. So what if Moore doctored the page a bit? He didn;t end up re-writing the newspaper article, and he didn't end up writing it himslef. he took what was there and re-arranged it for greater effect. Did that kill anybody? No. Did it have an effect? Yes - people now like Bush less. As Bush is the murderer of the innocents, I personally don't mind a white lie or two to kick him out of office. I'll let the Chomsky's do the factual/intellectual battle, and the Moores do the propagandal (is that a word?) and demagogueral (how about this?) battle. This isn't to say, of course, that Moore isn't for the most part factual and correct - he is. And, once again, real footage does not lie. A baby with its guts blown off is a baby with its guts blown off, no matter how much editing is done. Sorry, dude.

Cheers, Translator

so translator, its ok for moore to lie and deceive people and not give them facts to try to make his point across. but according to you Bush lied about Iraq(even though he didnt) and this is automatically wrong and he is evil and you wish bad will upon him. Thormachine also has no problem calling people neocons but whenever someone drops the L-bomb (liberal) on him he goes haywire. dont you see you own hypocracy. you people kill me


[This message has been edited by el stevieboy (edited 08-08-2004).]

you idiot....bush is a neocon....there isnt any speculation about that and it has nothing to do with you talking to me (someone you have never met) and calling me a liberal compared to me talking about Bush (a public figure) and knowing he is a neocon.

In order to create a freer safer Iraq why would they be setting up 4 to 14 permanent bases there? http://www.khilafah.com/home/category.php?DocumentID=9270&TagID=2
http://www.guardian.co.uk/Iraq/Story/0%2C2763%2C940405%2C00.html

Mr. Dark.....you are about to see a whole lot more "conquered" and kept land on the behalf of the US especially if Bush stays the president....

I really am done with this forum....i think im gonna let translator deal with you people....I am simply sick of this.....i am sick of this country and i am sick of the people who complacently live in it and casually watch while people die.....

you idiot your beliefs are liberal...leave be gone with you no one wants your hate being spewed here anymore anyways. move to france do somethin but leave all the good hardworking americans who believe in their president and know what is right alone. you can choose to believe what you want, but ill believe in what is right. goodbye and good riddence

The purpose of this thread was to bring the Moore discussions under some control with one heading--not for general namecalling!

Another fine, rational response, Thormachine. Anyone who can hate a whole country is guilty of over-simplification and over-generalization. That's simply self-evident.

"i am sick of this country and i am sick of the people who complacently live in it and casually watch while people die....."

If you are sick of this country then leave. No one is holding you here. Would you rather us casually watch people die or bring attention to it and stop it? Face the facts, people were being murdered by Hussein in Iraq.

Yes, Moore can lie because his lies do not endager the lives of others (at least not on a great scale). Bush cannot lie because his lies do.
IraqBodyCount count civilian death, and those are very conservative figures. 13 000 deaths, and more every day; an obvious and forseen lack of democracy (or the hope for one), and inflamed arab world - that is the effect of Bush's lies. Bush did lie, no matter what Moore said - there are plenty of records (or he showed himslef to be a total uncrtitical fool, in which case I wish that he lied, for with a lie one can hope that he is at least reasonable, while by being a fool he is plain scary).

Mr Dark, do let me know when and where the 300 000 figure came from.

Thor, my patience is running this as well, but this site is a very good place to go to when one feels like being a bit masochistic. Because responding to airjesse or el stevie is masochism.

Cheers, Translator