Troop surge is working

[Guthrie]

...Evidence, turn on the TV, watch the news. Read a paper.

I should scan the media for evidence because you don't have any, no thanks???

Come on, left right middle it does not matter. Some things are true without posting evidence.

The sun rises in the east, summer follows spring and most terrorists are Muslim these days.

as far as labling terrorists, 'Muslim,' it is NOT true and anyone accepting the lie in spite of having nothing but street corner evidence, is nothing but bigotry

if there is so much of this evidence, why is it no one can show it -

it is really sad when %$#&* guys believe their prejudice more than they believe the truth

[M.Dancer]

Not every German was a nazi, but almost every nazi was German...........

No, not almost every nazi was German

no of course not...everyone knows that almost every Nazi was Australian.....or Jamaican...or .....Swiss...anything but German......

......and that why we can say for sure that most terrorists are muslim....

[AndrewL]

Not every German was a nazi, but almost every nazi was German...........

No, not almost every nazi was German

no of course not...everyone knows that almost every Nazi was Australian.....or Jamaican...or .....Swiss...anything but German......

......and that why we can say for sure that most terrorists are muslim....

The definition of Nazi is pretty clear. There is no definition of terrorist. Some people might say OBL is a terrorists, others might say GWB is a terrorist. Without a definitoon that everybody agrees to we really cant say for sure that most terrorists are muslim.

Andrew

[M.Dancer]

There is no definition of terrorist

Not only is that demonstrably false, it is catagorically stupid.

We do need need unanimity to define something. Like saying there is no definition of theft, because a few thieves and a wingnut don't agree with the concensus definition.

Criminal acts intended or calculated to provoke a state of terror in the general public, a group of persons or particular persons for political purposes are in any circumstance unjustifiable, whatever the considerations of a political, philosophical, ideological, racial, ethnic, religious or any other nature that may be invoked to justify them.

http://www.un.org/documents/ga/res/49/a49r060.htm

[Guthrie]

There have been more Canadian and American Nazi's than there were German Nazi's ---

have you all forgotten William Beattie?

even in the 30's and 40's there were German, Brazilian, Chilean, Spanish, Polish, Serbian, Turk, Italian ... even French Nazi's -- read your history

[Peter F]

deleted - double post

[Peter F]

There is no definition of terrorist

Not only is that demonstrably false, it is catagorically stupid.

We do need need unanimity to define something. Like saying there is no definition of theft, because a few thieves and a wingnut don't agree with the concensus definition.

Criminal acts intended or calculated to provoke a state of terror in the general public, a group of persons or particular persons for political purposes are in any circumstance unjustifiable, whatever the considerations of a political, philosophical, ideological, racial, ethnic, religious or any other nature that may be invoked to justify them.

http://www.un.org/documents/ga/res/49/a49r060.htm

I think that is a valid description of Terrorism. Note that the description says that terrorism is unjustifiable. So any terrorists claims that they are doing it for God is bullshit. And any claim that Muslims - by the fact that they are muslims - are more likely to be terrorists is bullshit also.

Terrorism has come under all sorts of cloaks - and all bullshit; or have we already forgotten about the IRA and the Red Brigades? or lord knows how many terrorists groups in South or Central America, or the FLQ.

[Guthrie]

Thank you Peter F ---- spot on!!!

[ScottSA]

There have been more Canadian and American Nazi's than there were German Nazi's ---

have you all forgotten William Beattie?

even in the 30's and 40's there were German, Brazilian, Chilean, Spanish, Polish, Serbian, Turk, Italian ... even French Nazi's -- read your history

Woody, you need to graduate high school. Really, you do.

[AndrewL]

Not only is that demonstrably false, it is catagorically stupid.

You certainly jump into asshole mode quite easily.

I agree, i should have said there is no generally accepted definition of terrorist, smarty pants.

Criminal acts intended or calculated to provoke a state of terror in the general public, a group of persons or particular persons for political purposes are in any circumstance unjustifiable, whatever the considerations of a political, philosophical, ideological, racial, ethnic, religious or any other nature that may be invoked to justify them.

http://www.un.org/documents/ga/res/49/a49r060.htm

Based on that definition most terrorists are certainly not muslim. Sounds more like the history of global warfare in general to me.

Andrew

[AndrewL]

I think that is a valid description of Terrorism. Note that the description says that terrorism is unjustifiable. So any terrorists claims that they are doing it for God is bullshit. And any claim that Muslims - by the fact that they are muslims - are more likely to be terrorists is bullshit also.

Terrorism has come under all sorts of cloaks - and all bullshit; or have we already forgotten about the IRA and the Red Brigades? or lord knows how many terrorists groups in South or Central America, or the FLQ.

Note the inclusion of the word 'criminal' in that definition though. This is what makes it different from earlier definitions of terrorism. The most popular being, "terrorism is the act or threat of violence against civilians for the purpose of ideological, economic, or religious goals".

When we add the word 'criminal' we have a situation in whicg terrorism is fine as long as some institution, like the UN, or the American congress, says it is legal. It then ceases to be a crime, and hence by M. Dancers definition ceases to be terrorism. I don't like that definition at all.

Andrew

[M.Dancer]

Not only is that demonstrably false, it is catagorically stupid.

You certainly jump into asshole mode quite easily.

I agree, i should have said there is no generally accepted definition of terrorist, smarty pants.

Criminal acts intended or calculated to provoke a state of terror in the general public, a group of persons or particular persons for political purposes are in any circumstance unjustifiable, whatever the considerations of a political, philosophical, ideological, racial, ethnic, religious or any other nature that may be invoked to justify them.

http://www.un.org/documents/ga/res/49/a49r060.htm

Based on that definition most terrorists are certainly not muslim. Sounds more like the history of global warfare in general to me.

Andrew

I think I've already demonstrated the value of your uninformed opinions.No need to flog a dead horse.

[M.Dancer]

There have been more Canadian and American Nazi's than there were German Nazi's ---

Wow Woody. I know your attachment to specious arguments and hyperbole over powers the incentive to be factual or honest....like the purposeful misconstruing Nazi (National Socialist German Workers' Party) with any group you deem Nazi......

But in order to give you a chance to put your money where your foot is, I have done half your homework.

The general membership of the Nazi Party, known as the Parteimitglieder, mainly consisted of the urban and rural lower middle classes. 7% belonged to the upper class, another 7% were peasants, 35% were industrial workers and 51% were what can be described as middle class. The largest occupational group were medical doctors.

When it came to power in 1933 the Nazi Party had over 2 million members. Once in power, it attracted many more members and by the time of its dissolution it had 8.5 million members. Many of these were nominal members who joined for careerist reasons, but the party nevertheless had an active membership of at least a million, including virtually all the holders of senior positions in the national government.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nazi_Party

So there you have your base line ..1 to 2 million members. All you have to do now is somehow with lookinjg like aq blow hard is back up your absurd claim that there have been more than 1 million American and Canadian Nazi Party members.

Good Luck

[M.Dancer]

And any claim that Muslims - by the fact that they are muslims - are more likely to be terrorists is bullshit also.

The claim was that terrorists are likely to be muslim, not that muslims aree likely to be terrorists.

And we arew talking about current events, not italy in the 70s or Ireland in the 80s

[M.Dancer]

When we add the word 'criminal' we have a situation in whicg terrorism is fine as long as some institution, like the UN, or the American congress, says it is legal. It then ceases to be a crime, and hence by M. Dancers definition ceases to be terrorism. I don't like that definition at all.

Andrew

ho hum......Given that thereare laws regarding warfare, and given that you seem to be oblivious to them,regarding all warfare, lawful and unlawful as illegal, why do you bother debating an issue when you clearly ignore the parameters of the debate?

[ScottSA]

So there you have your base line ..1 to 2 million members. All you have to do now is somehow with lookinjg like aq blow hard is back up your absurd claim that there have been more than 1 million American and Canadian Nazi Party members.

Good Luck

I don't know why you feel it necessary to correct his obviously erroneous statements. He just makes up stuff and flings it out to see what, if anything, will stick. Next he'll claim there were more Japanese Shinto imperialists in Canada and the US than in Japan; just prior to claiming it's 'bigotry' to claim that Japanese nationals might have been spies.

[Peter F]

And any claim that Muslims - by the fact that they are muslims - are more likely to be terrorists is bullshit also.

The claim was that terrorists are likely to be muslim, not that muslims aree likely to be terrorists.

And we arew talking about current events, not italy in the 70s or Ireland in the 80s

Yeah, so? I'll agree that. Is it okay then to hate muslims? or is it okay to hate terrorists?

[M.Dancer]

It's okay to hate extremists....islamic, hindu, christian...........

[Canadian Blue]

Why not go after extreme right wing groups as well...

[Guthrie]

The, 'Surge,' can not work. The war was lost right about the same time Bush was declaring victory. Even now, the Buschistas can't even tell us who our allies are and who our enemy is -

and while McCain talks about how much better things are now that he can walk freely around a market place and while he fails to note the helicopters above and the squads of security all around - the violence doesn't just continue but it gets worse:

Link

BAGHDAD, Iraq - The Iraqi government raised the death toll on Saturday from a truck bomb in the town of Tal Afar to 152, making it the deadliest single bombing of the four-year-old war.

...

and our closest ally in the region condemns the US occupation:

Link

WASHINGTON: Saudi Arabia's unexpectedly harsh criticism of the US occupation of Iraq marked a turning point in the complex relations between Washington and its key Sunni ally that raises serious questions about the Bush administration's Middle East policy, analysts say.

Speaking to a summit meeting of Arab leaders last week in Riyadh, Saudi King Abdullah referred to the US troop presence in Iraq as an “illegitimate foreign occupation.”

US officials were dumbfounded by the portrayal of the costly US military operation that President George W Bush defends as an effort being carried out at the request of the Iraq government to help stabilise a fledgling democracy.

Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice telephoned the Saudi ambassador to Washington, Adel al-Jubeir, to seek an explanation of the king's remarks.

But she refrained from taking the matter up directly with her Saudi counterpart, Prince Saud al-Faisal, in an apparent bid to avoid aggravating the rift.

Analysts saw Abdullah's tough public stance as part of a move by the monarch to take the lead of a new pan-Arab movement to counter the rising influence of Shiite. Implicit in the king's criticism is an assumption that Bush's strategy in Iraq is destined to fail ...

[M.Dancer]

Why not go after extreme right wing groups as well...

Extremism, generally takes a very right wing stance, so that statement is somewhat redundent. Unless of course you are aware of an exremist christian or hindu org that didn't have the taint of fascism on it....

[weaponeer]

There have been more Canadian and American Nazi's than there were German Nazi's ---

have you all forgotten William Beattie?

even in the 30's and 40's there were German, Brazilian, Chilean, Spanish, Polish, Serbian, Turk, Italian ... even French Nazi's -- read your history

Guthrie,

What are you smoking and can I have some????

The nazi's were German pal, the arian super race. There were several people that joined the SS, and fought with them yes. The last defenders of Berlin in 1945 were French nazis.

People from Brazil are not strpping bombs to themselves and blowing up markets, Danish people are not driving car loads of explosives onto military convoys. Buddist monks are not flyng airplanes into buildings. Your arrguments here make about as much sense as someone in 1940 saying we should not attack or resist Germany because they are not nazis, they are not gassing people.

Another point, you would take your family to Yeman, Syria, and Iran on vacation, good when do you leave:) Of course you would because if anything happened to you, we would all see you on TV crying and whining about how the Canadian gov't should come and save you.....

[Liam]

Why not go after extreme right wing groups as well...

Extremism, generally takes a very right wing stance, so that statement is somewhat redundent. Unless of course you are aware of an exremist christian or hindu org that didn't have the taint of fascism on it....

I'm not picking a fight, but I would temper what you're saying by adding that today's extremists might appear to be that way with one or two notable exceptions (Mugabe in Zimbabwe and Chavez in Venezuela). Also, I think Mao and Lenin would qualify as two left wing extremists.

[M.Dancer]

Why not go after extreme right wing groups as well...

Extremism, generally takes a very right wing stance, so that statement is somewhat redundent. Unless of course you are aware of an exremist christian or hindu org that didn't have the taint of fascism on it....

I'm not picking a fight, but I would temper what you're saying by adding that today's extremists might appear to be that way with one or two notable exceptions (Mugabe in Zimbabwe and Chavez in Venezuela). Also, I think Mao and Lenin would qualify as two left wing extremists.

In the wash, an extremists like stalin is identical to hitler, or chavez

[Guthrie]

There have been more Canadian and American Nazi's than there were German Nazi's ---

have you all forgotten William Beattie?

even in the 30's and 40's there were German, Brazilian, Chilean, Spanish, Polish, Serbian, Turk, Italian ... even French Nazi's -- read your history

Guthrie,

What are you smoking and can I have some????

The nazi's were German pal, the arian super race. There were several people that joined the SS, and fought with them yes. The last defenders of Berlin in 1945 were French nazis.

People from Brazil are not strpping bombs to themselves and blowing up markets, Danish people are not driving car loads of explosives onto military convoys. Buddist monks are not flyng airplanes into buildings. Your arrguments here make about as much sense as someone in 1940 saying we should not attack or resist Germany because they are not nazis, they are not gassing people.

Another point, you would take your family to Yeman, Syria, and Iran on vacation, good when do you leave:) Of course you would because if anything happened to you, we would all see you on TV crying and whining about how the Canadian gov't should come and save you.....

Like I said, read your history. Wise up a little. Maybe quit such ugly, bigotted and misinformed beliefs.