The US had motive to go to war in Afghanistan before 911!
Thought you might be interested to know that the Taliban went to Texas in 1997, and then refused to build a pipeline talked about in the article below. Turns out, the US had motive to go to war in Afghanistan way before 911. Americans voted in Cheney (copresident) and that is when America went downhill.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/world/west_asia/37021.stmI am a Hindu. My religion is Hinduism and Gita is my guide to proceed to the destiny of my life. Yes, sometimes it is necessary to fight to kill the demons. Krishna, the Lord, the God, who convinced Arjuna to fight against Karuaba who were his near kith and kin but who were doing sins. The Army of United States fought against Talibans and now it is time to return. In Gita it is instructed if the sinners do not hear the saints, it is fruitless to advice the sinners. The Army should not sacrifice any more life; they should be allowed to return to their home, their mother land where their mother is waiting for them.
The Taleban were in meetings with the Bush administration in early 2001 too I believe.
Ha! PNAC created in 1997!
http://www.informationclearinghouse.inf … le1665.htmBingo! Cheney had motive for Afghanistan. He had motive to do a lot more that Americans have no clue about.
We know it's all a big racket, have known for a long time, for more than a hundred years. But nobody really seems to care. But the racketeers need to share that wealth, that's what gets the public riled up, if we don't get a piece of the action. Maybe some free basic health care or something, that would be nice. Or $125 gas, or college tuiton that an inteligent person could actually afford. Something besides getting robbed by the Banksters.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smedley_Butler
It was a joke. Any time any one ever suggests that something other than "they hate us for our freedom" is the reason we were attacked and why we invaded Afghanistan, then they always say that "you are just a conspiracy theorist"
I cannot believe he is back on this bogus story he post months ago and was proven to be false then. I guess that's what the left calls recycling
Prove the story is bogus. Or else maybe you should stop talking.
I already did in two other forums when you brought it up before, hence why I said "proven to be false then". Perhaps it is time to look for new material, maybe talk about a current issue we face. Obama has created plenty of them
You can say it was false, but you have no proof. Indeed, other stories have come out which have bolstered this view. Here is one:
http://www.historycommons.org/context.j … libanvisit
They went to Nebraska and Mount Rushmore. This was in 1999. After this all discussions with the Taliban are broken off.
Also, when the Taliban went to Texas in 1997 it was reported by both the BBC and the Telegraph.
And you know that Reagan met with the Taliban and we have a picture of it: http://www.legitgov.org/Reagan-calls-Ta … ng-fathers Reagan armed those guys in 1980's.
I tried locating where you debunked the BBC but I can't find it, American View. By the way I don't think your view is that patriotic.No BG, it is you that posts stories and like I said it was already proven to be false in a previous thread. You can keep posting it and hoping, but it will not change that it did not happen.
And lets be clear, it is Obama administration that is talking with the Taliban and they walked out on him.I asked you to verify that the article was false. Just saying so does not make one of the most reputed journalistic site false. I said I cannot find where you said it was false. Post that or try going fishing.
I do not waste my time on those who have blinders on. You know you were discredited on this issue before and if you do not want to admit it that is for you to live with. Get over it, I have better things to discuss with people who are civil.
What you can't remember how you supposedly discredited the article? You can't even remember? You are boasting of that which you can't remember?
Why waste our time?I am not the one with memory issues. Typical left argument, try to change the subject, or recycle untrue information
I do not waste people's time. Wasting time is bringing up an issue that you know is not true and want people to prove you wrong that already had done so.
Why am I not amazed you continue to put out fake and phony information.
WOW you have a bogus picture on a bogus article. Look closely, you can see it is an obvious fake, and not a good job of it.
I wonder if you read the quote credited to Reagan and attached to that picture:
"These gentleman are the moral equivalent of our founding fathers". - Ronald Reagan
Well the only truth in the article was the quote, only he never said it to people in a bogus meeting of the Taliban. He was referring to the Contras in the civil war in Nicaragua as we backed those against Communism. Here is the real quote:
"Ronald Reagan's efforts to eradicate Communism spanned the globe, but the insurgent Contras' cause in Nicaragua was particularly dear to him. Battling the Cuban-backed Sandinistas, the Contras were, according to Reagan, "the moral equivalent of our Founding Fathers." Under the so-called Reagan Doctrine, the CIA trained and assisted this and other anti-Communist insurgencies worldwide."
Oh and one more thing as you try to insult our intelligence. The picture claims this took place in 1985. There was no Taliban then. The Taliban did not form until 1994.
Active September 1994 – September 1996 (militia)
September 1996 – December 2001 (government)
2004–present (insurgency)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taliban
Once more you have tried to push false information as fact. We all see your agenda.You are only partly correct. Reagan spoke of freedom fighters, not Taliban, but Mujahideen.
We armed the Mujahideen starting in 1980. The Taliban were supported by the US because the factions of the Mujahideen could not stop fighting each other. But long before Reagan praised the Mujahideen as being freedom fighters:
http://www.thirdworldtraveler.com/Afgha … liban.html
You still didn't bother to deny the efforts of the US to bring the Taliban to Texas. http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/socio … rism06.htm from which I quote:
"In early 1997, Taliban officials met at Unocal’s Texas office:
[Unocal’s Barry] Lane says he wasn’t involved in the Texas meetings and doesn’t know whether then-Governor George W. Bush, an ex-oil man, ever had any involvement. Unocal’s Texas spokesperson for Central Asia operations, Teresa Covington, said the consortium delivered three basic messages to the Afghan groups. “We gave them the details on the proposed pipelines. We also talked to them about the projects’benefits, such as the transit fees that would be paid,” she says. “And we reinforced our position the project could not move forward until they stabilized their country and obtained political recognition from the US and the international community.”
Covington says the Taliban were not surprised by that demand …. In December 1997, Unocal arranged a high-level meeting in Washington, DC, for the Taliban with Clinton’s undersecretary of state for South Asia, Karl Inderforth. The Taliban delegation included Acting Minister for Mines and Industry Ahmad Jan, Acting Minister for Culture and Information, Amir Muttaqi, Acting Minister for Planning, Din Muhammad and Abdul Hakeem Mujahid, their permanent UN delegate.7"Unreal, what part of a calender do you not grasp. You quote 1980, Taliban was not around till 1994, 14 years after. I notice you did not mention about the fake photo but want to change the story again by going back to a story I already proved was false, just like the link and picture you posted above. Again, believe what you want, we all see what is true and what your agenda is.
BTW, I find it interesting you claim Cheney and Bush were in on it, yet you just posted a quote that contradicted your own statement. From your quote
"Lane says he wasn’t involved in the Texas meetings and doesn’t know whether then-Governor George W. Bush, an ex-oil man, ever had any involvement."
Then your next post says they met Clinton's Undersecretary of State. Can you not get the story right? You cannot because it did not happen. Move on, I am done wasting my time with you.I already said the Taliban was created in 1994 to offset the warring factions of the Mujahideen. Bush may not have been directly involved, but he was governor of Texas and surely aware of the meeting. He had ties with Enron who also was involved with the Taliban. What is wrong with you?
You deny the Taliban went to Texas? Is that your point?
You saw this right?
Unocal Vice President of International Relations John J. Maresca (later to become a Special Ambassador to Afghanistan) testified before the House of Representatives that Unocal’s pipeline would extend across Afghanistan and Pakistan to the Indian Ocean and suggested that with the pipeline the Caspian basin could produce 20 percent of all the non-OPEC oil in the world by 2010. However, he warned, “It’s not going to be built until there is a single Afghanistan Government.” (US Congress, 2/12/98)
This is a very eye opening article where the pipeline plan is reported by the NY Times. I suggest you read it:
http://rethinkafghanistan.com/blog/2012 … -commerce/
I thought the pipeline thing was common knowledge? We sure as hell didn't go in there to free the oppressed wimmins! Anybody else see Karzai's latest shenanigans?
http://ontd-political.livejournal.com/9419761.htmlThe code is depressing to be sure, and the leaders we support want it. So that isn't the reason we went there is it? Nice report Kerry.
Karzai is nothing more than a puppet for the Taliban. It is no coincidence he is in favor of the code and many other issues that favor them. His true colors are coming out each day.
As are the GOP colors here in America!
American Taliban.What did you call me. Who the hell do you think you are. I put up with a lot of your attacks and nasty crap giving you respect for your opposite view. But you do not even understand the word. Yet all you do is talk about how everyone attacks you. I have not attacked you and this was totally uncalled for.
You aren't much of a patriot, IMO, either. I think you are not seeing the obvious in what is going on.
Your opinion does not matter to me. What have you ever done for this country other than whine, complain and spread false stories? What a laugh, someone who thinks Sarah Palin is responsible for the Arizona shooting of a Congresswoman has no credibility in questioning a persons patriotism.
Don't forget Glenn Beck.
The hateful rhetoric contributed to his mind-set. Which is why the RW used to call anyone who disagreed with Bush un-American. Turn fellow Americans into The Enemy.Yea LMC, and the left speaks such perfect civil language. Please, time to stop the rhetoric and admit the true, both sides are about as civil as a tornado.
No way! This spiteful hate came from the right. And it started way before Obama was even elected. I don't see ANY pol coming close to these Tea Party Republicans, or their supporters.
That's what the left would say. Show me one quote from Bush or Cheney calling anyone that disagreed with them Un-American. Show a clip, not a left blog or opinion.
Their supporters AV. The people who went to web-sites, and coffee shops and public meetings, and grocery stores.
THEY called us un-American. THEY blasted even Cindy Sheehan, who had lost a son. THEY constantly told us if we don't like it, leave. If you don't support the president, you don't support the troops, you are un-American, Blah Blah Blah.
Just because you didn't experience it, doesn't give you the right to deny it happened.LMC,
Do not change the subject like the left tries to do. Show me one quote from Bush or Cheney calling anyone that disagreed with them Un-American. Did Bush or Cheney ever call a police officer a racist, never, but I know a President that has, I know you do too but you will never admit it. Who plays the race card every time someone disagrees with Obama, the left and you know that's true too because you do it all the time. Who formed attack watch to spy on fellow Americans and you know who did that too, oh and he did not learn the first time because he has done so again but given it a different name. I know you know who but again will not admit it.
Cindy Sheehan, the same Cindy that John Kerry call a "liar", the one who Soros gave money to to purchase property by Bush's ranch, but then turned his back on when she started to protest the left, leaving the Democratic Party, talks worse about Obama than she ever did about Bush. You just do not hear about her because she turned on the left so the media does not cover her anymore.I never said Bush and Cheney called anyone un-American! Talk about trying to distort the subject.....
Their supporters did...the American public who voted for them.Ok, if that is you position, then show me that then, show me the clips of people saying that. I am sure there may be one or two, but that was not the beliefs of the masses, but show me just one clip.
I lIVED it!!
and I can find clips....but kid wants to play angry birds.
Later for that.Understand, truth be told, I even play Angry Birds from time to time.
From a CBS article:
"Town hall tempers were already rising before Nancy Pelosi and Steny Hoyer wrote in USA Today on Monday that "drowning out opposing views is simply un-American."
That follows a fellow Democrat, Rep. Baron Hill, labeling health care protesters as "political terrorists." Rep. Dave Obey invoked words like "thuggery" and "disgraceful," and Sen. Blanche Lincoln also invoked the "un-American" epithet, before retracting it a short while later.
Calling someone "un-American" is political argument's equivalent of heavy artillery, if not a battlefield nuke: it's designed to put your opponents on the defensive, forcing them to rebut the nearly-unrebuttable, and verges on questioning their patriotism.
Yet the tactic has been around for so long -- since at least the 1800s -- that employing it is a tradition that's practically, well, American.
Protestants in 1893 viewed a school bill as "un-American"; an editor of a Syrian newspaper in New York City protested in 1899 that neither he nor his paper were un-American; some murders around the same time were dubbed "un-American."
In 1905, no less an authority than the New York Times labeled the not-yet-a-state of New Mexico the "most un-American part of the United States," on the grounds that its culture and traditions were too different, and in some cases simply too primitive.
This time around, conservatives wasted no time in denouncing Pelosi's choice of words. Charged the National Republican Congressional Committee: "According to the Democratic leadership, if you oppose an increase in healthcare costs, massive deficits, and higher taxes, you are 'un-American.'" RedState.com said that in 2005, "dissent was patriotic and the activists were funded by Hungarian billionaires. In 2009, dissent is Nazism and protestors are not authentic since they show up on their own dime without subsidy."
http://hotair.com/greenroom/archives/20 … rican-now/
http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index … 644AAFlyqYAnd...??
Bush's supporters used it against people too. So--now they claim we're un-American all over again...this time for supporting Obama.
Looks like they have it all ways.Where, show me I have asked you to do so and you have not, yet I have showed you the left doing it. I could have loaded this up with the many articles and videos on it but did not.
Why do the left like to play the victim, they claim others do what they themselves are actually doing, and they claim to be the victim. Unreal.
Here is some more for you
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sdQkyum5cQM
This Governor call Republicans Un American
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jueUe553AX8
This one call Reupublicans Un Americans and Traitorous
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7Ll_psMeTuwGo for it AV.
You got a small taste of it when I said the GOP are like Taliban.
I have been told to move to Cuba, that I must support the president in time of war, and that if I don't support the troops, I am free to stand in front of them.
I have been called a whiner and a hater of America. In fact, right here in these HP, I have been told that I hate hate hate hate hate....yet, any statement of a right-winger is called "an opinon".
We have a head of the gvt saying his goal is to make the president fail, more filibusters in 2 years than any other time in history, and an obstructionist gop that is working to the detriment of the American people.
If they have their way, women will be charged with 1 st degree murder for a legal medical proceure that has been around since time began.
Women who use birth control are likenend to sl*ts, and tv and radio that regularly imply the president is out to destroy America.
He hates white people, and is a racist...really?
He wants to send us back to pre-civil war days...really?
You can use all the clips and whatnot that you want....I Know what I am living through, and apparently, it bears no resemblance to your reality.
Well, your reality is no where in orbit with mine either.
I am with Ed Shultz: There is no dealing with these people...they have no desire to work together, or help America recover.
We will have to choose sides. I am on Obama's. You are not. End of story.
And if anyone has any other side to be on...I would like to see it.
Yea, any other side is better. even some of the left is turning on him. You answered your own hatred, you think what the left does is OK and the hell with everyone else. Sorry, this country does not work that way. I guess you are Ok with agenda 21 now, I know you were against it earlier
I never mentioned agenda 21. And I do feel the left is better, yes.
Just as you do the right--And the heck with us who don't feel the same. I've heard it all before.
Heard it being against Bush, and now hear it being for Obama....
nothing changes, but the vitriol gets worse.
LMC,
No I know you did not mention it here, It was another thread. I was looking to see if you changed your mind and was for it now. I know most of the left and right are against it.No--I agree with this: "drowning out opposing views is simply un-American."
And the biggest drowner of all is M O N E Y. You know Money, the REAL God of this country.
That and all these people who have this superior attitude like "people need to grow up and be like me"!!
Or--"Our way is the way everybody must live"..."no this" and "no that" and "we will codify our beliefs by law": So now what?.. personal freedoms are not included in the bill of rights?
Yes--drowning out people with no voice is un-American. Saying you want the president to fail is un-American. Telling people unless they act and think just like you they are apes is un-American. Depriving rights under the guise of religion is un-American!!
"We have joined together to form a more perfect union"
Not a religious theocracy or a rich man's paradise.
"ALL men and women are created equal."....We are born children of God....not rich, poor, or any particular religion.
That's what I take the founders to mean: WE as individual human beings come 1st before anything man-made is thrown on us. WE are all entitled to equal treatment.
This does not happen in a theocracy or a vulture capitalist playground.
IMHO
"Tennessee lawmakers will consider a controversial measure on Wednesday that could intimidate women seeking abortions by requiring that the names of doctors who perform the procedures be published online. The legislation, known as the Life Defense Act of 2012 or House Bill 3808"
These are Operation Rescue tactics. Gvt by operation rescue!
You can't prove that Palin and the language used in the campaign did not contribute to the deranged man's outburst.
Actually, I can with a lot more than what is below. Time to throw out the left talking points. Palin is not even running for President and Obama campaign has just spent over one million on ads attacking her. She is irrelevant to this election cycle, yet the left keeps going after her. Makes you wonder.
http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2011/01 … -laughner/
Here is something from the left:
"In a flier posted on its web site, the controversial church writes, "THANK GOD FOR THE SHOOTER -- 6 DEAD!" The message continues: God appointed this rod for your sins! God sent the shooter! This hateful nation unleashed violent veterans on the servants of God at WBC--hoping to silence our kind warning to obey God and flee the wrath to come."
Funny, Palin's name is no where to be found.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/01/0 … 06319.html
" According to a former friend, Bryce Tierney, Loughner had exhibited a longstanding dislike for Gabrielle Giffords. Tierney recalled that Loughner had oft expressed a view that women should not hold positions of power.[44][45] He repeatedly derided Giffords as a "fake". This belief intensified after he attended her August 25, 2007 event when she did not, in his view, sufficiently answer his question: "What is government if words have no meaning?"[15] (Loughner kept Giffords' form letter, which thanked him for attending the 2007 event, in the same box as an envelope which was scrawled with phrases like "die bitch" and "assassination plans have been made".)"
As you can see, he had a long time hatred of Gifford long before Palin ever came along. To say it was Palin is disingenuous and nothing more that a ploy from the left to blame the right for a liberal shooting another liberal.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jared_Lee_ … al_chargesFor you to say that the poisonous rhetoric coming from Palin and Beck had no effect at all on a deranged man is also disengenuous.
Their purpose was to effect hate. And the message spread through-out the land.And Bill Maher, Ed Shultz and the like speak such perfect civil kings English.
I do not know why you keep bringing up Beck, the man does not belong on the air.You know I have said so before.
The problem with the left is she tell the truth and the left does not like it, She does not call Obama names, she just points out his policies, maybe if his policies were not so wrong, the left would not be upset. Hey,if Obama was a successful president, no one could could say anything, could they.
Again, as it pertains to the Arizona shooting, the shooter hated Gifford way longer than before Palin even came around. Stick to the facts, oh sorry, the left does not like the facts.She does not tell the truth. The fact that you think she does, is the perfect example of the divide in America.
Ok, show me one time she did not tell the truth, show me one time she called someone a name like boob, or the c word.
No she did not, never did. This is what the left does, spin something into something it is not.Her is her quote:
"The Palins have no intention of providing a rating's boost for David Letterman by appearing on his show. Plus, it would be wise to keep Willow away from David Letterman"
Of course she was responding to Letterman's statement that the kid was not the boyfiends kid but Palin's husband was the father. Hence why she said she would keep Willow away from Letterman. But you and the left want to spread stories.
Was that the best you could do?"Palin admitted that "while what Mr. Halderman did is wrong. It doesn't change the fact that David Letterman is a dirty old man, like Chester the Molester." Palin was quick to qualify the reference. "For those of you wondering how I know about "Chester the Molester", let's not forget that Letterman is the masher here not me."
The feud between Palin and Letterman began earlier this year when the talk show host made a joke about one of Palin's daughters being knocked up by Yankee baseball player Alex Rodriguez during the seventh inning stretch. Letterman later clarified that he meant Palin's 18 year old daughter, Bristol, not 14 year old daughter, Willow, and went further to say that the joke was in poor taste. Regardless, Palin demanded that Letterman apologize to women everywhere."
How odd that she demand Letterman apologize to all women, yet Russsshhhhhh's lame apology seems to be a-ok with her now? After all--Rush apologized for using bad language....not for the intent of his message.
I geuss her daughters are more REAL than the rest of us.
Hey, I was against what rush said just as much as you are. I am not a fan of Rush and have said so before. Having said that, at least he apologized. I guess everyone can debate all they want if it was sincere, but he did it. I never hear the left apologize, there in lies the difference.
Letterman apologized too. And it was after that she called him a chester the molester.
Ted Nugent was ON THE STAGE with BECK at the first Tea Party rally, and both endorsed Palin for president.....
This, after he told Obama to suck on his gun, and called Hilary a wh*re.
No one EVER apologized for that, no one EVER asked Nuge to apologize, and Palin never rejected his endorsement!
The Ugly had been going on a LOOONG time.
Beginning with willy horton, and going downhill from there.
And when anyone hits back, it's like the crime of the century.
http://www.alan.com/2012/03/18/tea-part … eraland%29
If that article is true, I hope they lock his ass up for many years. Having said that, do you really want to go there, do you really want to start with all the lefts sex crimes, stealing, misappropriation of funds, and more. I really do not have that kind of time to list all the left criminals not to mention all the ones that the left is OK with and some who still serve.
It is true...it was at a concert, and seen by many....of whom CHEERED when he said it.
And he was on with Beck at TP rally..praising Palin as the next pres...I watched it.
And he's Hannity's friend, has his own radio show, and a frequent contributor to Fox..
It's nothing new, that's what you don't get. Rush comparing Chelsea Clinton to a DOG...I watched that too.
So, when Maher makes a statement about Palin....sorry--I think she deserves what she gets.
And now Maher is sticking up for Russsshhhhhh.
Oh please, Maher has to, he was facing losing his HBO show.
You know, for someone who hates Rush as much as you claim you must listen a lot to hear all this.
So you admit to it being OK for the left to through all the hate speech they do. Nice to hear one of you admit it.
My friend was Paul Sissaro, does that make me a mafia gangster? Who cares who he knows, if he did it he needs to go to jailI'm ok with hate speech thrown at people who use hate speech themselves....and that would include Palin.
I'm not ok with calling a woman who testified about birth control a sl*t.
pretty easy to understand, isn't it?
What we are seeing here my friend is that the left stands on their heads and then proclaims the rest of the world to be upside down. You know they have to spread as much misinformation as possible because there is an election coming.
Just like the WMD's that THEY started up about during the Clinton years.Hey Bill Clinton started the ball rolling on the Afghan pipeline. But clearly the forces for trying to make it happen were Unocal, Enron, Cheney, Halliburton, and the Republicans.
My only point was that the US had motive to go to war in Afghanistan prior to 911. That is fact. All you guys in response are blowing hot air.Sorry, but it the hot air is not coming from our direction, You are the one who posted this thread that was debunked months ago. You posted other linked here that were also debunked and shown as not accurate, yet you persist even though your last post contradicts what you have been saying about Bush and Cheney. There is an old Abbott and Costello bit
Costello- Hey do you know what makes a balloon fly?
Abbott- Yea Hot air
Costello- So what's keeping you on the ground.You have debunked nothing. I don't see any proof you debunked anything. Are you denying that Unocal's guy who became ambassador to Afghanistan denied speaking about the pipeline to the Caspian Sea? It is in the congressional testimony.
That is fact. Our nation had motive to invade Afghanistan and build that pipeline prior to 911.Yawn. Same ole same ole. You are the only one who does not see it or admit it. You were debunked, your articles and photos were not accurate. I wonder, do you think the Fluke testimony was a hearing? Actually do not bother to answer, we all know you will say it was. when it was not. If you were not debunked why did you not respond to what i posted that shows the facts. You even changed your position about the Taliban after I did so I know you read it. Goodbye BG have a good day
The Taliban were formed by US and British intervention because the "freedom fighters" Reagan spoke about continued to fight one another. So yes, the Taliban started up in 1994, but Reagan in a state of the Union messages included Nicaragua and Afghanistan in the list of those who had "freedom fighters".
No BG,
you are changing your story again and that is not how it happened. Reagan's Quote that you said was made by Reagan to the Taliban in the oval office in the fake picture was a quote to the Contra fighters. It was never attributed to the Taliban or the freedom fighters who were not the Taliban. The freedom fighters were just Militia rising up against Russia.
Was I talking to you??
I thought you said you are an Independent??I am, how dare you call me a Taliban, that was low even for you
"As are the GOP colors here in America!
American Taliban."
Where does it say you are the Taliban? And haven't you numerous times said you are not Republican?
You are twisting things to smear me, as usual.First, get the facts straight, I do not smear you, I have defended you from other attackers and you know that. I have said to you many times we do not agree but I respect your right to express your views.Who stuck up for you when you were called anti jewish, or told several other you did not attack until someone attacked you first. Many of those people are no longer on HP anymore, yet you have begun to attack others first. Maybe your passion is not letting you see it, but I do.
I see you put quotes on your statement this time, you did not the first time. I said Karzia was showing his true colors as he supports the Taliban. The next post was you and your GOP statement then on a separate line you said American Taliban. It is quite plain you called me American Taliban and now you want to twist it into something else. You cannot take back or spin what you said.I feel the GOP in America are like the Taliban.
The Taliban thinks religion and men should make the laws, and supresses women.
Same is going on here with this GOP.
And--I put it in quotes to show that's what I had said. That's the usual way of doing it.
Never did I say You AV are the Taliban!
AND--since you took it personal... are you GOP?Day by day it becomes clear that the left intends to go women women women until November to deflect from the fact that they have nothing and will never have anything but nothing.
Just exactly like everything four years ago was RACISM!!!!!!!!!!!!
They will continue to do this. It's Marx and Alinsky through and through and why i no longer support the party i am a registered member of.Really? Colorado has a bill there...right now, to be voted on.
Women will be charged with 1st degree murder for an abortion.
They are forcing women to have un-needed ultra-sounds to satisfy the religious right...
Ridiculous voter id laws meant to prevent people from voting...
And the call for war on Iran.
You may see this as your America...I reject it UTTERLY.
And I'm just as much an American as you.See once more typical exaggeration from the left. Have you read the bill? I honestly will say I did not know about this till I read your post.This is a bill designed to allow criminal charges to be brought against third parties who injure a pregnant woman and her late-term, unborn child.
Are you aware that 38 states had fetal homicide laws? Are you aware that the law EXCLUDES abortion doctors EXCEPT if they cause the death of the woman by means of malpractice.
Maybe the left should read before going off on half truths and turn them into inaccurate information.
The pipeline and oil (Afghans discovered three more exploitable sites)are the only valuable motivations!
In 97 Bush was still Governor of Texas....so he had a chip on his shoulder for Hussein, and a chip on the other shoulder for the Taliban. Nice.
"When will right wing partisans stop electioneering using hatred? NEWS FLASH: your consumers may eat that up, but 75% of Americans reject it."
I think you need to do some research on who is spreading the hate.
Quite obvious. Fox news and Clear Channel radio.
All one big family. And with Citizens United......there is no limit to their spreading propaganda and lies. Oh joy.
The Fox Effect:
“Fox News has created a generation of woefully (and objectively) misinformed ideological sycophants to pursue its radical agenda. It's no accident. Now David Brock and Ari Rabin-Havt show that no matter how unethical and dishonest you think Fox News is, the reality is that they're much, much worse.”
—Markos Moulitsas, publisher, Daily Kos
Day 2 of Obama presidency, they are calling him a socialist,within a week, saying he has failed. I saw with my own eye, Oliver North call him anti-American.....you don't want to go through that history. OR the things hate-talk radio says. That is what was put on us non-Bush supporters too, and now it's put on us for supporting Obama.
It's a psy-op, and when you are the target of it...you know it.No LMC, it is not Obvious. History lesson, Fox only came on line in 1996 to counter the left wing propaganda station, MSNBC.
Before Bush even became, the left declared Bush would never get a judge approved and would be a one term Prez like his father. Th leaving admin was so childish they took the W off computer keyboards.
Again, do some research on who is spreading the hate. Look for some REAL information, and not from blogger with an agenda like Daily KOSAiles worked for Nixon!
This goes WAY back. I'll repeat: after they shot King, Kennedy, Kennedy, X, Lennon....
The great society ideals were off the table. Since then, it's been robber baron rule.
2 prongs of the same attack. Violence is really too obvious sometimes.
Operation Mockingbird, Co-intelpro. Effective, without the obvious murders attached.
It's NO accident that a newspaper editor suggested the assasination of president Obama.
Slasher movies. Violence. NRA acting like everybody deserves a gun willy-nilly.
It's all a mind-game. IMO
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-Ny42Mdg5qo
Love is the answer. Not hate.First, great song, I love John Lennon's music,
Ailes was Media director for Nixon, prior to that he was the executive producer of the Mike Douglas show, and extreme leftist for the time. Ailes was hired away from MSNBC to help form Fox.
And yes, Love is the answer, to bad to many on both sides forgot thatSe we aren't understanding what these guys are trying to tell us. If we would just look at the world the way they do then we would realize that there is no evil in the world that does not emanate from the U.S. We should all just become cute and fuzzy bunnies and wait for the enlightened ones to give us a carrot.
Oh by the way lots of the peaceful happy "enlightened ones" were arrested at Zucotti Park last night. That's where they want the wars to be.
Remember now: Peaceful=Zucotti Park.......Evil Racists=Afghanistan.Look at the world as it is.....TP never were tear-gassed. Not even that Church group who hates gays and protests military funerals!
They are allowed peaceful protest....OWS is not. What does that tell you?I can't speak for the church but the Tea Party has never done anything to warrant being gassed...or arrested. As a matter of fact it is a well known fact that when these Tea Party folks leave the area they have been in it is cleaner than when they arrived.
Now when your "enlightened people" learn how to behave like something other than apes..........wait a minute, is that because you think we are apes(??)...then maybe they won't get gassed and so forth.
Learn.....I get it: OWS are apes....
I learned that lesson long ago: Dirty pinko commie f*gs.
Nice to see it regurgitated again....NOT.I never said anyone wee apes.
However OWS are playing their part as useful idiots. I saw a video where Andreww Brietbart went out to a rally where a man held up a sign that said "Glenn Beck Lies!!!!"
Andrew asked him to name one lie, not one hundred, just one.
They guy looked dumbfounded and walked away.
Most of those people have no earthly idea what it's about they just know they are supposed to hold signs and shout.
These are the "Enlightened People".Here's one: "Barack Obama has a deep-seated hatred of white people. He's a racist"
And what was Breitbart's response to OWS?
Kids like my daughters. Young people--people who care?
"Filthy Freaks and rapists".
"Now when your "enlightened people" learn how to behave like something other than apes.........."
---I would say he's the one who needed to learn. Oh, and yes, that does look like you are calling them/me apes.Breitbart was an out of control human being. I don't think he had all his marbles. I think he was crazy, and I think it was time for him to go. Sorry for his family. But he was destined for disaster.
Hey you be what you want to be. You missed the whole point of the Breitbart thing which was basically you just had a mob. There was no enlightened anyone except the union handler who bundled them all away from him. When asked a question they just gaped.
LMC,
Obama does have a deep seated hatred of white people, He even wrote so in his books. It is his own admission.Oh give me a break!!
Maybe he hates white suppression, and white supremacy, and dangerous white people with guns....just like I do!!
Did you hear about that 17 yr old black kid who was shot by a white man for being black??? Not in 1950....a few days ago!
THAT is hateful! Try to understand the issue, instead of making it a smear-campaign.
IMHO
What one asshole person does is in-material. You put a quote that I am not sure was ever said claiming someone said that. I am saying the quote is correct and it was Obama by his own words in his book that said so. Ge discusses at great length his disgust with his mother because she was white. HIS WORDS, not mine. You need to understand the issue.
You do not have to say anything JS, they will tell you what you said and how you feel
OK--what does this mean to you?
"Now when your "enlightened people" learn how to behave like something other than apes.........."
It tells me that OWS is breaking the law and the Tea Party is not.
Really? What law? The new one Congress just passed??
And they are using military tactics on American citizens....really bad ones, like burning their flesh and blasting their hearing, and of course pepper-spraying and beating with clubs. This is YOUR idea of America?? Since when did dissent become illegal? I thought it was a tenent of America? Bill of Rights, and all.
And who sent them? Are they PAID for? Not Democracy AT ALL.Unlawful assembly, they did not have a permit as required by NYC ordanence, Rape, indecent exposure, defication in public, disoredrly conduct as in blocking the Brooklyn Bridge which is against the law in NY, You are not allowed to stay overnight in a NY park despite the fact no one removed them, theft, Do I need to go on?
And you hit it on the head, they were paid, that is not lawful assembly. The only ones sprayed were the ones that attacked the police first. Funny some people only see the clips OWS puts out showing one side, but the Media and NYPD clips show the whole incident, but OWS does not want you to see those
Conservatives have an area of their brain that is incapable of critical thought, and it's called the 'Foreignpolicyaneus'. Any point of view that argues that a war is not necessary is 'crazy liberal nonsense'.
"Our opponent ... is someone who sees America, it seems, as being so imperfect, imperfect enough, that he's palling around with terrorists who would target their own country," Palin told a group of donors in Englewood, Colo. A deliberate attempt to smear Obama, McCain's ticket-mate echoed the line at three separate events Saturday.
"This is not a man who sees America like you and I see America," she said. "We see America as a force of good in this world. We see an America of exceptionalism."
It was, perhaps, no accident that the man who introduced Palin said this:
"On Nov. 4, let's leave Barack Hussein Obama wondering what happened," a Florida official says, warming up the crowd for Palin, who wasn't yet there.
No need to wonder.....she's an operative for the neo-cons. "War of all wars"...
Psychological battle. For the hearts and minds they want to capture."Our opponent ... is someone who sees America, it seems, as being so imperfect, imperfect enough, that he's palling around with terrorists who would target their own country,"
What LMC, truth hurt, he did hang out and admire people who did target their own country.
"On Nov. 4, let's leave Barack Hussein Obama wondering what happened,"
I really have to hear from you what is wrong with this statement. Like the left never says something about beating their opponent in an election.I guess by your thinking Joe Namath is a Neo-con because he boasted he would win the Superbowl before the game was played."What LMC, truth hurt, he did hang out and admire people who did target their own country."
We have pictures of Rumsfeld shaking Saddam's hand....Bush holding hands with a Saudi Prince...did anyone of Palins ilk say anything about Bush, or his administration pallin around with terrorists?
The FBI, in the 60's and 70's, was targeting American citizens with violence....were they not allowed to defend themselves?
Are TP'ers the only ones who have the right to arm themselves as defense against the gvt???
Because...that's what they said when they went to Obama rallies with guns. And the stock of guns and bullets dissappeared after he was elected. The right wing is arming itself....for what?You got pictures, post them. Show us, or are they like the fake one that was tried to be passed earlier from someone else. If they are Photoshoped they can be spotted real quickly when downloaded.
Show me a TPer showing up to Obama rallies with guns. I know which prison they would be in right now if they did that, and we all know the media campaign that would never end if that happened. Not to mention that would be all Obama would need to get his gun laws passed. Obama would be relentless on that issue if it really happened, maybe fast and furious would not have happened had what you claimed happened instead. TPers have only one issue, the financial issues of the country.Geez AV...we live in different realities.
We sure do, you make a claim you have a picture, I ask to see it, you and that was your response. If there was a picture you would have rubbed my face in it.
What happens every time the left says the TP are obstructionists, there was some kind of debate over spending or lack of cuts or fiscal restraint. Blame them for what they do, no reason to make up other stuff up. And I do not mean you, I mean the leftIn case you didn't see this above, I would like your comment here:
I already said the Taliban was created in 1994 to offset the warring factions of the Mujahideen. Bush may not have been directly involved, but he was governor of Texas and surely aware of the meeting. He had ties with Enron who also was involved with the Taliban. What is wrong with you?
You deny the Taliban went to Texas? Is that your point?
You saw this right?
Unocal Vice President of International Relations John J. Maresca (later to become a Special Ambassador to Afghanistan) testified before the House of Representatives that Unocal’s pipeline would extend across Afghanistan and Pakistan to the Indian Ocean and suggested that with the pipeline the Caspian basin could produce 20 percent of all the non-OPEC oil in the world by 2010. However, he warned, “It’s not going to be built until there is a single Afghanistan Government.” (US Congress, 2/12/98)
This is a very eye opening article where the pipeline plan is reported by the NY Times. I suggest you read it:
http://rethinkafghanistan.com/blog/2012 … -commerce/Now it's Truman and Eisenhower, is Mickey Mouse next? You change you story more times than Carter has peanuts.
Bush was involved, now you say he was not but he knew. You never mentioned or admitted the Taliban did not form till 1994, I pointed that out. Show where you said that, funny, I reread all the posts and do not see it. You showed a bogus picture of Reagan meeting with the Taliban, not me, you posted the quote from Reagan and said he said it to the Taliban when in fact he said it about the Contras fighting in Nicaragua.
So now you have my comment here, it has not changed from the comments above, it has not changed from the thread the first time you posted this inaccurate crap and my comments will not change in the future. As I also said above, we see your agenda.Reagan supported the pre Taliban anti communist fighters.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reagan_Doctrine
Reagan said this in the state of the union from the Wiki link:
Reagan himself was a vocal proponent of the policy. Seeking to expand Congressional support for the doctrine in the 1985 State of the Union Address in February 1985, Reagan said: "We must not break faith with those who are risking their lives...on every continent, from Afghanistan to Nicaragua... to defy Soviet aggression and secure rights which have been ours from birth. Support for freedom fighters is self-defense."
So, View, here is a Reagan quote saying the Afghans were freedom fighters. Wake up little buddy. You are asleep.Hey little Buddy, I see you did not take my advise and enjoy the day, instead you had to continue to spread falsehoods. From your newest link:
"At least one component of the Reagan Doctrine technically pre-dated the Reagan Presidency. Following the 1979 Soviet invasion of Afghanistan, the Carter administration began providing limited covert military assistance to Afghanistan's mujahideen, in an effort to drive the Soviets out of the nation, or at least raise the military and political cost of the Soviet occupation of Afghanistan. The policy of aiding the mujahideen in their war against the Soviet occupation was originally proposed by Carter's national security adviser Zbigniew Brzezinski and was implemented by U.S. intelligence services. It enjoyed broad bipartisan political support.
Although the CIA in general and Charlie Wilson, a Texas Congressman, have received most of the attention, the key architect of this strategy was Michael G. Vickers, a young Paramilitary Officer.[2] Michael Pillsbury, a Pentagon official, implemented Reagan Doctrine initiatives including the Stinger missile decision. President Reagan's Covert Action program has been given credit for assisting in ending the Soviet occupation of Afghanistan"
I notice you have changed your tune, you now say PRE TALIBAN when earlier you claimed Reagan had the Taliban in the Oval Office. So once more your story changes as you continue to be debunked Oh and speaking of debunked, The article says CARTER was the one who started to arm the Afghanis against Russia, and NOWHERE DOES IT EVEN SAY THE WORD TALIBAN!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!. Or enve PRE-TALIBAN WHY Because the Taliban DID NOT EXHIST!!!!!!!!
Also from your article:
" In 1991, the Taliban (a movement originating from Jamiat Ulema-e-Islam-run religious schools for Afghan refugees in Pakistan) also developed in Afghanistan as a politico-religious force."
The Taliban started as a movement, long after Reagan was President The Taliban were not the freedom fighters.
OK Do you get it now,. You keep at it and keep providing links that prove you wrong. Who is asleep???But the Taliban were similar to the "freedom fighters", only the US motive changed to wanting a pipeline built through Afghanistan. The freedom for the pipeline was not then permitted by the Taliban. That gave the US motive to go to war with them and that is the point of this thread.
So View comment on the Maresca's testimony since you are so sure of your position.
I have addressed this with you before. You are worse than a broken record. Why do you not try and prove the posts and links I showed are not accurate? Because you cannot so you just keep saying the same ole same ole and it still is not accurate, never will be accurate
BG, it is Sunday, It is very nice outside. Go get some fresh air, spend some time with the family if you are married, go do something else. I am done wasting my time with you. Go enjoy the dayYou keep saying you addressed it before. I don't see where. Did you forget your argument? Why are you continually posting what you don't know?
I post what I know, I cannot help it if you want to live in denial.
"You Lie"!!!
Little boy president. Uh huh...just your normal Americans.I notice you never addresss any of the issues I raised....like the FBI in the 60's and 70's targeting citizens, Ailes working for the Right-wing faction since Nixon, and a newspaper editor suggesting Obama be assasinated!!!
well I'll be....
"Earlier this week, an Arizona state senate committee backed a “tell your boss why you’re on the pill bill” that would allow employers to demand proof that their employees are not using birth control for contraceptive purposes before their insurance will cover the pills. In an interview on Meet The Press this morning, Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) slammed this assault on working women, and even urged his fellow Republicans to finally end their lengthy war on women’s reproductive health""After last night's raid, there's been a call by #ows for us to demand a federal investigation of policing of occupations."
Are these private police forces??? Or is it the World Police?
And is that the same thing?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=82l2lxvv … ata_playerSo American View here is proof that Reagan called the pre Taliban fighters in Afghanistan Freedom fighters. From the Wiki article on the Reagan Doctrine:
Reagan himself was a vocal proponent of the policy. Seeking to expand Congressional support for the doctrine in the 1985 State of the Union Address in February 1985, Reagan said: "We must not break faith with those who are risking their lives...on every continent, from Afghanistan to Nicaragua... to defy Soviet aggression and secure rights which have been ours from birth. Support for freedom fighters is self-defense."So here is the deal, the pre Taliban fighters in Afghanistan were considered to be freedom fighters as the quote from his speech says. So perhaps American View can wrestle with that knowing that the ultimate goal in the 1990's was to build a pipeline through Afghanistan to huge oil deposits in the Caspian Sea. I suppose American View has a hard time thinking that if we supported the "freedom fighters", we would support the Taliban. For oil we would support anyone.
So here's the deal, BG has no clue. So perhaps BG can wrestle with the fact everything he has posted here is 100% inacurate, then he changes his story. He again cliams the Taliban ond the freedom fighters are the same. From his own link.
"" In 1991, the Taliban (a movement originating from Jamiat Ulema-e-Islam-run religious schools for Afghan refugees in Pakistan) also developed in Afghanistan as a politico-religious force."
The Taliban started as a movement, long after Reagan was President The Taliban were not the freedom fighters. "
In 1991 they were only a movement, they came to power in 1994.
Also form his link
"By 1996, with backing from the Pakistani ISI, Pakistani Armed Forces, and al-Qaeda, the Taliban had largely defeated the militias and controlled most of the country."
In 1996, the Taliban with help defeated the freedom fighters to take control of the country.
I suppose BG has a hard time understanding the facts of history since he is not accurate about what he posts, and even the sources he cites all do not agree with what he posts. Time for BG to get a new hobby, history is not working out for him.I already admitted that the Taliban were not the freedom fighters in Afghanistan that Reagan said were freedom fighters. But Reagan called people in Afghanistan freedom fighters and then we supported those who succeeded the "freedom fighters" because they were going to allow a pipeline to be built.
So, don't say that it was just in Nicaruaga that Reagan was referring to when he said freedom fighters.
And the Taliban's refusal to build the pipeline gave the US motive to attack them, and that is the theme of this thread, which you seem to deny.This is the tenth time in this hub alone you have changed your story, pick one, stick with it because no matter where you try to spin it it is still inaccurate.
This is what you said just one post ago:
"So here is the deal, the pre Taliban fighters in Afghanistan were considered to be freedom fighters"
Now you say:
"I already admitted that the Taliban were not the freedom fighters in Afghanistan"
Now you want to spin it that you did not say it but Reagan did. Reagan said "ANYONE FIGHTING THE COMMUNISTS ARE FIGHTING FOR FREEDOM" He never call the Taliban freedom fighter BECAUSE THEY DID NOT EXIST YET.
As for the rest again you are not even close. Go find something else to do.
kind of like this
"Since April 2011, a total of 1.64 million people have pitched in to own a piece of this campaign. #Obama2012"
Barack Obama
"Every five bucks helped. 97.7% of February's contributions were $250 or less, for an average donation of $59.04."
NOT some Las Vegas BILLIONAIRE holding up the whole campaign!!! (Gingrich)
Mitt wants to repeal roe v wade??
Re-peal citizens united----we'd be much better off.Holy-Moly....here it is!:
SEPTEMBER 11, 2001: Insider Trading 9/11 ... the Facts Laid Bare
http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php? … ;aid=29863
I almost made in my pants when I read this: PROMIS involved! Octopus.....Orly Taitz....Netanyahu!
did you see Gordon Duff's article yesterday?
http://www.veteranstoday.com/2012/03/19 … -military/
OMG. it's coming down
Related Discussions
- 21
How many believe that the Taliban Went to Texas. I can Prove It.
by Gary Anderson 12 years ago
So what is your opinion? If you have research, post it. No one can understand what is going on in the world unless you understand this.
- 20
Did you know the Taliban went to Texas in 1997?
by Gary Anderson 14 years ago
Did you know that the real reason we ousted the Taliban and are still fighting in Afghanistan is because Bush Sr and Halliburton have oil interests in the Caspian? Did you know that they need a pipeline in Afghanistan in order to import the oil? Did you know that the Taliban were given the royal...
- 121
Obama's plans for Afghanistan
by Dave McClure 14 years ago
------------------------------------------------------------KABUL, Afghanistan - President Hamid Karzai of Afghanistan said yesterday that he is in full agreement with President Obama's newly announced strategy for the country, saying it was "exactly what the Afghan people were hoping...
- 137
Re-instateing 'real' Donald Trump as President Again
by Miebakagh Fiberesima 20 months ago
The American nation is on the boil! It's law enacting body or Legislation is likewise on the boil on impeaching biden. Both Nancy Pelosi and Kamala Harris are target to be impeached as not to compromise the Presidency! So Biden, Kamala, and...
- 23
Has Afghanistan become Obama's Vietnam?
by Ralph Deeds 12 years ago
Richard Holbrooke warned of the danger of Afghanistan becoming another Vietnam. He opposed Obama's surge. He was working on a negotiated settlement of what amounts to a civil war between the Taliban and the government in Kabul. He believed that "every conflict has to end at the negotiating...
- 9
The U.S. government left its own journalists behind in Afghanistan
by Sharlee 20 months ago
"Now that the U.S. troop withdrawal from Afghanistan is complete, many stories of heroic efforts to save Americans and Afghan allies are pouring out, each describing one facet of the chaos and dysfunction that plagued the effort to evacuate all of those in Kabul who had placed their trust in...