John McCain In The News

[Shady]

I guess if the 911 hijackers hadn't screamed it before slamming into the WTC, I'd agree more with McCain's interpretation. Unfortunately reality has attached a much different connotation to that particular phrase. Not at all like Oh my God. That's absurd.

[GostHacked]

I guess if the 911 hijackers hadn't screamed it before slamming into the WTC, I'd agree more with McCain's interpretation. Unfortunately reality has attached a much different connotation to that particular phrase. Not at all like Oh my God. That's absurd.

Don't forget most of the hijackers were SAUDIS. But there is a need to bomb every other country but Saudi Arabia.

[sharkman]

I guess if the 911 hijackers hadn't screamed it before slamming into the WTC, I'd agree more with McCain's interpretation. Unfortunately reality has attached a much different connotation to that particular phrase. Not at all like Oh my God. That's absurd.

You know, it's funny to what lengths some will go to rationalize the acts of mass murderers.

[Topaz]

Watching the news, I haven't seen Americans against a war since Nam. Good for them.

[Guest American Woman]

Watching the news, I haven't seen Americans against a war since Nam. Good for them.

The majority of Americans weren't against the conflict in Vietnam in the beginning. That changed through the years. Just as it's changed regarding U.S. involvement in other conflicts.

[Shady]

Don't forget most of the hijackers were SAUDIS. But there is a need to bomb every other country but Saudi Arabia.

Who cares? Is there not a certain connotation associated with that phrase because of certain, and many events over the past several years? Answer, of course. Your strawmen are growing tiresome. Regardless, 13 hijackers could have been selected from Afghanistan, or Syria, or Pakistan, etc. The fact that most were from Saudi Arabia was done on purpose, to embarass the Saudi Royal family. Being Saudi wasn't the reason they were flying those planes, being radical Muslim was. And there's only a need to bomb hostile governments. We tend not to bomb ally governments for the most part. I feel dumber having to explain all of this to you. It's should be somewhat logical and common knowledge.

[bud]

the worst terrorist attack in world history

that's if the only history you know is from september 11th , 2001 to september 12th, 2001.

[bud]

can we all calm down and send out a prayers for our pilots before they get on their planes and blow up some shit?

Edited September 8, 2013 by bud

[GostHacked]

Who cares? Is there not a certain connotation associated with that phrase because of certain, and many events over the past several years? Answer, of course. Your strawmen are growing tiresome.

Facts are not strawmen. They are simply facts.

[Guest American Woman]

Don't forget most of the hijackers were SAUDIS. But there is a need to bomb every other country but Saudi Arabia.

So if Canadians were to train in terrorist camps in Afghanistan and then carry out such an attack against the U.S. - we should bomb Canada, rather than targeting the training camps and those running the training camps?

[Shady]

So if Canadians were to train in terrorist camps in Afghanistan and then carry out such an attack against the U.S. - we should bomb Canada, rather than targeting the training camps and those running the training camps?

Yes, apparently we're suppose to abandon all critical thinking.

[Shady]

Facts are not strawmen. They are simply facts.

Facts completely unrelated to the topic. You didn't address anything I mentioned. Once again, the reason why planes were flown into the WTC wasn't because they were Saudis, it was because they were radical Muslims. We don't "want to bomb everyone" but Saudi Arabia. Just hostile governments in certain circumstances. Nobody wants to bomb Jordan, or Turkey, or UAE, or Kuwait, etc.

[Argus]

Facts completely unrelated to the topic. You didn't address anything I mentioned. Once again, the reason why planes were flown into the WTC wasn't because they were Saudis, it was because they were radical Muslims. We don't "want to bomb everyone" but Saudi Arabia. Just hostile governments in certain circumstances. Nobody wants to bomb Jordan, or Turkey, or UAE, or Kuwait, etc.

There is an argument to be made that Saudi Arabia is the source of most of the religious fundamentalism gripping the Muslim world today. Their Wahabi sect is extremist in nature and in teaching, and they have spent billions of dollars exporting it around the world. Pakistan is the way it is today largely becaues of all the wahabi schools there which were and are funded by Saudi Arabia. The problem is it's a little late to bomb the Saudis in response, so what the west has been trying to do instead (with some success) is co-opt Saudi rulers into getting that fundamentalism toned down.

[GostHacked]

So if Canadians were to train in terrorist camps in Afghanistan and then carry out such an attack against the U.S. - we should bomb Canada, rather than targeting the training camps and those running the training camps?

Your comparison is a little muddy.

A - Are these Canadians part of an intelligence service?

or

B - Are these Canadians simply wanna be jihadist fundamentalists?

And do we keep the notion that the US intelligence services, specifically the CIA helped fund/arm/train those terrorists? That is if you are simply swapping Saudis for Canadians and leaving the rest of the equation in.

Still would mean that your CIA should be questioned because they are the biggest facilitators of their own blowback.

But as Argus has pointed out the Saudis are able to export their brand of terrorism. I'll add all with the help of the USA.

[Shady]

Your comparison is a little muddy.

A - Are these Canadians part of an intelligence service?

or

B - Are these Canadians simply wanna be jihadist fundamentalists?

And do we keep the notion that the US intelligence services, specifically the CIA helped fund/arm/train those terrorists? That is if you are simply swapping Saudis for Canadians and leaving the rest of the equation in.

Still would mean that your CIA should be questioned because they are the biggest facilitators of their own blowback.

But as Argus has pointed out the Saudis are able to export their brand of terrorism. I'll add all with the help of the USA.

The "Saudis" don't export "their" brand of terrorism. Radical Muslims, living in Saudi Arabia, and other countries do that. The Saudi government and these radical Muslims are adversaries, not allies. Regardless, getting back to the original topic, the term Allah Akbar, in our present day and age, is much much different than Thank God. It's intellectually dishonest to ignore reality and suggest otherwise. But GH, that doesn't mean bombing Syria, or any other country for that matter is a good idea, or should be done. The two aren't mutually exclusive.

[GostHacked]

The "Saudis" don't export "their" brand of terrorism. Radical Muslims, living in Saudi Arabia, and other countries do that. The Saudi government and these radical Muslims are adversaries, not allies. Regardless, getting back to the original topic, the term Allah Akbar, in our present day and age, is much much different than Thank God. It's intellectually dishonest to ignore reality and suggest otherwise. But GH, that doesn't mean bombing Syria, or any other country for that matter is a good idea, or should be done. The two aren't mutually exclusive.

Well this is good to know when we hear accusations of Iran exporting terrorism.

But at least more are starting to say that bombing Syria is going to be very counter productive.

[Guest American Woman]

Your comparison is a little muddy.

It's not muddy at all. You seem to think that because most of the terrorists came from Saudi Arabia - we should have bombed Saudi Arabia. Saudi Arabia even stripped bin Laden of his citizenship.

[Topaz]

It's not muddy at all. You seem to think that because most of the terrorists came from Saudi Arabia - we should have bombed Saudi Arabia. Saudi Arabia even stripped bin Laden of his citizenship.

Maybe you should have but your president at the time was friends with the Royal family and business partners.

[Smallc]

I guess if the 911 hijackers hadn't screamed it before slamming into the WTC, I'd agree more with McCain's interpretation.

But...his interpretation is correct. How people use the phrase can vary greatly....but it doesn't change the meaning of the phrase.

[Topaz]

lets not forget that some of these members of government also make big bucks when there's a war, through their investments. McCain wife made in big bucks when they supplied the troops with refreshements... like her beer.

[Guest American Woman]

McCain wife made in big bucks when they supplied the troops with refreshements... like her beer.

Source, please.

[GostHacked]

McCain getting a verbal lashing at a town hall.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H8SycdU3QDk#t=59

[Shady]

But...his interpretation is correct. How people use the phrase can vary greatly....but it doesn't change the meaning of the phrase.

No, his interpretation is incorrect.

[BC_chick]

I like McCain. He should have been nominated in 2000 instead of Bush, but Carl Rove smeared him so badly with the Christian Right he didn't have a chance. He finally got the nomination in 2008 but Bush ended up screwing that up for him too by leaving that disastrous legacy for the Republican party. No republican had a chance that year.

2000 should have been his year at the nomination. He deserved it and the world would be a much better place today had he gone on to be president.

[bud]

I like McCain. He should have been nominated in 2000 instead of Bush, but Carl Rove smeared him so badly with the Christian Right he didn't have a chance. He finally got the nomination in 2008 but Bush ended up screwing that up for him too by leaving that disastrous legacy for the Republican party. No republican had a chance that year.

2000 should have been his year at the nomination. He deserved it and the world would be a much better place today had he gone on to be president.

i'm surprised that you like him. despite his occasional honesty, he's one of the biggest prostitute politicians around. one look at the campaign money he receives and from whom and the bills he has sponsored and it's enough for me to know that he's one of the biggest problems when it comes to politics. despite what he keeps repeating, what is going on in syria is not the act of rebellious syrians, but the mercenaries of death and destruction, misguided by savages like mccain and the zionist cohorts, and paid for by the american tax dollars.

Edited September 12, 2013 by bud