ABC Documentary Special

[Guest Loki]

You're an idiot!!!!, our President is a moron, who killed more American troops than any other tyrant in the world.

He is still trying to fight his father's war (Sr. would not allow Scharwtkoff to march right through the middle east, sound familiar moron, were still paying that price)

This man is pot smoking, fall down drunk, who is being led by a war monger(fill this one in yourself) who is killing our young soliders day in and day out.

Although I'am not a Bill Clinton supporter, he did not contributr towards 911, god rest their souls....

PS: I hope I'm in front of him at the "Holy Gate" don't want the big guy pissed off when I arrive, I already have my crosses to bare.....

GOD BLESS THE USA

BRING OUR TROOPS HOME NOW AND DEFEND OUR BORDERS, LET HE REST OF THE WORLD FEND FOR THEMSELVES!!!

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Don't be so quick to close the borders dude. The Dems are counting on the illegal immigrant vote.

[Guest Patriot]

You're an idiot!!!!, our President is a moron, who killed more American troops than any other tyrant in the world.

He is still trying to fight his father's war (Sr. would not allow Scharwtkoff to march right through the middle east, sound familiar moron, were still paying that price)

This man is pot smoking, fall down drunk, who is being led by a war monger(fill this one in yourself) who is killing our young soliders day in and day out.

Although I'am not a Bill Clinton supporter, he did not contributr towards 911, god rest their souls....

PS: I hope I'm in front of him at the "Holy Gate" don't want the big guy pissed off when I arrive, I already have my crosses to bare.....

GOD BLESS THE USA

BRING OUR TROOPS HOME NOW AND DEFEND OUR BORDERS, LET HE REST OF THE WORLD FEND FOR THEMSELVES!!!

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

No wonder you're doing so poorly in 10th grade, your homework's not done and you're on the computer after 10:00PM typing things you don't have a clue about.

[Guest Guest]

An unproven alligation. There's much evidence to support his involvement, such as giving $10,000 to families of suicide bombers and supplying safe havens to terrorists. But of course the Kool-aiders will never acknowledge this.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I see you selectively believe some of what the government tells us and ignore the parts you don't like. HYPOCRITE!

[Guest Guest]

An unproven alligation. There's much evidence to support his involvement, such as giving $10,000 to families of suicide bombers and supplying safe havens to terrorists. But of course the Kool-aiders will never acknowledge this.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

The REAL evidence says that al Qaeda was responsible for 9/11 and Saddam had NO TIES to al Qaeda. TRY leaving FANTASYLAND once in a while.

[Guest Guest]

Thank You, Concerned Citizen. It's good to see not everyone swigs Kool-aid.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Yeah! There's always THOSE like YOUR little cowboy hero who pickled their brains with Jim Beam and now don't have the common sense of a horseshoe.

[Guest Guest]

Don't be so quick to close the borders dude.  The Dems are counting on the illegal immigrant vote.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

And the WANKERS will worry about building a wall down south when the REAL threat is the long, open northern border.

[Guest Loki]

You say " The basic premise is that the media is not intentionally biased, but rather their own personal views are the middle ground that they use as the standard ".

Isn't the middle ground by defintion un-biased?  It would seem 'middle' puts it between biased views.  If so, how can you then make the case the media is biased?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Yes, but THEY consider THEIR views to be the middle ground, rendering the entire thing subjective. And to think people challenged my reading comprehension.

[Guest Guest]

You're an idiot!!!!, our President is a moron, who killed more American troops than any other tyrant in the world.

He is still trying to fight his father's war (Sr. would not allow Scharwtkoff to march right through the middle east, sound familiar moron, were still paying that price)

This man is pot smoking, fall down drunk, who is being led by a war monger(fill this one in yourself) who is killing our young soliders day in and day out.

Although I'am not a Bill Clinton supporter, he did not contributr towards 911, god rest their souls....

PS: I hope I'm in front of him at the "Holy Gate" don't want the big guy pissed off when I arrive, I already have my crosses to bare.....

GOD BLESS THE USA

BRING OUR TROOPS HOME NOW AND DEFEND OUR BORDERS, LET HE REST OF THE WORLD FEND FOR THEMSELVES!!!

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Wow Wyatt..you're Mistaken on a number of levels.

The first line, i wont even address, as it's just ignorant at best. Lest stick witht he facts rather than opinion.

#1..The REASON we stopped when we did during GW#1 was because the Coalition of other Arab States, all of whom supported that little adventure pulled the plug. Once the Iraqis had been pushed back out of Kuwait, they put the stop on things, refusing to support our removing Hussein from power, without that support, the UN took over, declaring the no-fly zones, and other sanctions, which Hussein routinely broke, which is what led up to our removal of him from power.

#2.. Yes, Clinton DID contribute towards 9-11, mainly be declaring that Terrorism was a primarily Law-Enforcement Problem, rather than a National Security problem. WTC 93, USS Cole, NAirobi, Khobar, Mogadishu, and a number of other incidents, gave the impression to these guys that we were weak, and wouldnt respond. LISTEN to some of the tapes made by Bin Laden and others even before 9-11 and you'll hear them exclaiming that the US is a paper tiger, and wont do anything if attacked. BOTH administrations made some mistakes, dont get me wrong, but the culture of the Clinton Administration, especially in our Intelligence Organizations, emboldened the bad guys to where they thought they could suceed.

IMO it's much like the Iranians in 1979, after watching Carter for 4 years, and our Lack of Support for Reeza Pahlavi during the "Student's Rebellion" and our lack of response to Opec's blackmail during the oil crisis, they figured they could take our Embassy, and people without any repercussions. We had ONE military response, and due to a number of factors, not the least of which was Carter's insistence on micromanaging the situation, that mission was a failure, giving Khomeini more confidence that he could win against us. As soon however, as Carter was Defeated..the Hostages were returned. They knew that Reagan wouldnt hesitate to Stomp them.

[Guest Guest]

Wow Wyatt..you're Mistaken on a number of levels.

The first line, i wont even address, as it's just ignorant at best. Lest stick witht he facts rather than opinion.

#1..The REASON we stopped when we did during GW#1 was because the Coalition of other Arab States, all of whom supported that little adventure pulled the plug. Once the Iraqis had been pushed back out of Kuwait, they put the stop on things, refusing to support our removing Hussein from power, without that support, the UN took over, declaring the no-fly zones, and other sanctions, which Hussein routinely broke, which is what led up to our removal of him from power.

#2.. Yes, Clinton DID contribute towards 9-11, mainly be declaring that Terrorism was a primarily Law-Enforcement Problem, rather than a National Security problem. WTC 93, USS Cole, NAirobi, Khobar, Mogadishu, and a number of other incidents, gave the impression to these guys that we were weak, and wouldnt respond. LISTEN to some of the tapes made by Bin Laden and others even before 9-11 and you'll hear them exclaiming that the US is a paper tiger, and wont do anything if attacked. BOTH administrations made some mistakes, dont get me wrong, but the culture of the Clinton Administration, especially in our Intelligence Organizations, emboldened the bad guys to where they thought they could suceed.

IMO it's much like the Iranians in 1979, after watching Carter for 4 years, and our Lack of Support for Reeza Pahlavi during the "Student's Rebellion" and our lack of response to Opec's blackmail during the oil crisis, they figured they could take our Embassy, and people without any repercussions. We had ONE military response, and due to a number of factors, not the least of which was Carter's insistence on micromanaging the situation, that mission was a failure, giving Khomeini more confidence that he could win against us. As soon however, as Carter was Defeated..the Hostages were returned. They knew that Reagan wouldnt hesitate to Stomp them.

They knew reagan would stomp them?!! Please, when 241 brave Marines were killed by Hebollah in Beirut in Oct 83, Reagan did NOTHING.

[Guest Patriot]

And the WANKERS will worry about building a wall down south when the REAL threat is the long, open northern border.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

You're reading those radical left bloggers again. The northern border isn't anything like our southern border due to the remoteness of much of the area; heavily forested with no roads.

[Guest Patriot]

You're an idiot!!!!, our President is a moron, who killed more American troops than any other tyrant in the world.

He is still trying to fight his father's war (Sr. would not allow Scharwtkoff to march right through the middle east, sound familiar moron, were still paying that price)

This man is pot smoking, fall down drunk, who is being led by a war monger(fill this one in yourself) who is killing our young soliders day in and day out.

Although I'am not a Bill Clinton supporter, he did not contributr towards 911, god rest their souls....

PS: I hope I'm in front of him at the "Holy Gate" don't want the big guy pissed off when I arrive, I already have my crosses to bare.....

GOD BLESS THE USA

BRING OUR TROOPS HOME NOW AND DEFEND OUR BORDERS, LET HE REST OF THE WORLD FEND FOR THEMSELVES!!!

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Read the above post and you'll understand why your momma always told you to stay away from drugs.

[Guest Radagast]

Wow Wyatt..you're Mistaken on a number of levels.

The first line, i wont even address, as it's just ignorant at best.  Lest stick witht he facts rather than opinion.

#1..The REASON we stopped when we did during GW#1 was because the Coalition of other Arab States, all of whom supported that little adventure pulled the plug.  Once the Iraqis had been pushed back out of Kuwait, they put the stop on things, refusing to support our removing Hussein from power, without that support, the UN took over, declaring the no-fly zones, and other sanctions, which Hussein routinely broke, which is what led up to our removal of him from power.

Except for the last sentence, I have no argument. Unless that's Bush's new fall back reason for the Iraq invasion and occupation. The reasons given for taking out Saddam were a- his possession of WMDs and b-  his cavorting with al Qaeda, both of which turned out to be false.

#2..  Yes, Clinton DID contribute towards 9-11, mainly be declaring that Terrorism was a primarily Law-Enforcement Problem, rather than a National Security problem.  WTC 93, USS Cole, NAirobi, Khobar,  Mogadishu, and a number of other incidents, gave the impression to these guys that we were weak, and wouldnt respond.  LISTEN to some of the tapes made by Bin Laden and others even before 9-11 and you'll hear them exclaiming that the US is a paper tiger, and wont do anything if attacked.  BOTH administrations made some mistakes, dont get me wrong, but the culture of the Clinton Administration, especially in our Intelligence Organizations, emboldened the bad guys to where they thought they could suceed.

Terrorism IS primarily a law enforcement problem. One may use the military to remove governments who give safe haven to terrorists. However, it takes good old fashion police work to track down the individuel terrorists..ya know, I hate that word 'terrorist'. It gives them more respect than they deserve. They are nothing but vicious, crazy, murdering, criminal scum.

I think that it is a stretch to assume that the 'Culture' of the Clinton Administration somehow gave strength to Osama & Co. These are very dedicated crazy people. They are willing to kill themselves to kill us. They don't care if it's Clinton's way or Bush's way they are dedicated to attack us and they will attack us. If anything the misguided bravado expressed by Bush has hurt us. We have 140,000 troops caught in the crossfire of a civil war in Iraq. The root of that civil war, like it or not, was the removal of Saddam from power. 

IMO it's much like the Iranians in 1979, after watching Carter for 4 years, and our Lack of Support for Reeza Pahlavi during the "Student's Rebellion" and our lack of response to Opec's blackmail during the oil crisis, they figured they could take our Embassy, and people without any repercussions.  We had ONE military response, and due to a number of factors, not the least of which was Carter's insistence on micromanaging the situation, that mission was a failure, giving Khomeini more confidence that he could win against us.  As soon however, as Carter was Defeated..the Hostages were returned.  They knew that Reagan wouldnt hesitate to Stomp them.

Iran is a study in how manipulation by foreign powers in the Middle East/ Persia eventually came back to to bight the West in the ass. After the Ottoman's were defeated, the UK and France did some selective surveying and carved out countries to suit themselves more than the populations in those countries. Over time despots like the Shah (Pahlavi), Saddam and others became leaders of these British and French inventions. They ruled with a jack boot. Uprisings were quickly dealt with. When Islamic leaders started to make Western Culture the enemy of God ... the Shah's days were numbered. No amount of support from the West could have helped him stay in power, in fact, it was his support from the west that drove the radical Shia into power. I believe the same fate will befall whatever government we leave behind in Iraq. This is no longer a war for the United States in Iraq, it is an occupation. We can't win an occupation.

In the end, neither the clever political blustering of Ronald Reagan or the less clever brand of G W Bush has prevented radical Islam from growing more popular. Of course, neither did the more quiet and calculating policies of Carter or Clinton. However, if you truly believe that Iraq, as a country, is better off now than they were before our invasion ... perhaps I can interest you in a bridge?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

[Guest Guest]

You're reading those radical left bloggers again.  The northern border isn't anything like our southern border due to the remoteness of much of the area; heavily forested with no roads.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Dollars to donuts there's more north African Muslims with the potential for radical beliefs in Quebec Province alone than in all of Mexico.

[Guest BushBacker]

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

It's obvious you have a lot of time on your hands and you don't know what you're talking about.

"Terrorism is primarily a law enforcement problem" ??? That's one of the dumber statements I've seen here.

[Guest Loki]

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

A BRIDGE, I've always wanted one. Is it near Brooklyn???

[Guest Guest]

  "Terrorism is primarily a law enforcement problem" ???  That's one of the dumber statements I've seen here.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

You apparently never read your own statements.

[Guest Patriot]

Dollars to donuts there's more north African Muslims with the potential for radical beliefs in Quebec  Province alone than in all of Mexico.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Good idea, let's bomb Quebec.

[Guest Patriot]

It's obvious you have a lot of time on your hands and you don't know what you're talking about. 

  "Terrorism is primarily a law enforcement problem" ???  That's one of the dumber statements I've seen here.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

You're right, BushBacker. How can we ever have an intelligent debate with these Kool-aiders when they say things like that. But I guess no one ever said the cut and run defeatocrats were smart.

[Guest Radagast]

It's obvious you have a lot of time on your hands and you don't know what you're talking about. 

  "Terrorism is primarily a law enforcement problem" ???  That's one of the dumber statements I've seen here.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

That's good! You are one of the dumber posters I've seen here ... so we're even.

[Guest Radagast]

A BRIDGE, I've always wanted one.  Is it near Brooklyn???

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Ahhhh Loki ... yer just too quick for me. ... I wanted to toss an insult at you but I couldn't think of an opposite term for 'Defeatocrat' ... any ideas?

[Guest Guest]

It's obvious you have a lot of time on your hands and you don't know what you're talking about. 

  "Terrorism is primarily a law enforcement problem" ???  That's one of the dumber statements I've seen here.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Actually, the Bush administration is a law enforcement problem. Dummy, Rummy, and the Dick hold themselves to be above the law, never a sign of good leadership.

[Guest Guest]

Read the above post and you'll understand why your momma always told you to stay away from drugs.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

MY mama told me to stay away from sanctimonius, self-serving, REMFs like you. STILL good advice.

[Guest Guest]

You're right, BushBacker.  How can we ever have an intelligent debate with these Kool-aiders when they say things like that.  But I guess no one ever said the cut and run defeatocrats were smart.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

SHAPE UP! PatRat The FACT is that 'cut and run' is a Repulsivecan tactic originated by Tricky Dicky to leave the presidency in disgrace to avoid the prosecution he deserved.

[Guest Patriot]

MY mama told me to stay away from sanctimonius, self-serving, REMFs like you. STILL good advice.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Your "mama" ?? should have also warned you about dressing in your sisters clothes.

[Guest Guest]

Your "mama" ??  should have also warned you about dressing in your sisters clothes.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Oooooooooooook..................the REMF makes an attempt at humor.