SwiftVets.com Forum Index SwiftVets.com
Service to Country
 
 FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups   RegisterRegister 
 ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

Kerry Wins; Queda attacks; Martial Law declared
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3  Next
 
Post new topic   This topic is locked: you cannot edit posts or make replies.    SwiftVets.com Forum Index -> Swift Vets and POWs for Truth
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
mikest
PO2


Joined: 11 May 2004
Posts: 377

PostPosted: Tue May 18, 2004 4:45 am    Post subject: Re: Kerry Wins; Queda attacks; Martial Law declared Reply with quote

fortdixlover wrote:
My worst fear:

Kerry wins. Then Al Queda nukes NY, as they said they'd like to. Kerry declares Martial Law.

This would give the Left the perfect opportunity to fulfill its agenda by force:

The end of free enterprise. Government control of industry and the economy.

Confiscation of private firearms.

Suspension of Freedom of Speech; jail or worse for politically incorrect speech.

Suspension of that pesky document, the Constitution.

Thought-Reform camps.

Socialist-level taxation.

U.S. military put under U.N. rule, as Kerry once opined, at the mercy of U.N. corruption and its tyrants.

Antisemitic persecution (judenhass for those who want to play the "semitism" wordgame), per the Left's current pet hatred, and the abandonment of Israel.

and so forth.

Even worse nightmare:

At the behest of all the left-wing groups funded by the Heinz foundation, the left might set up such a sequence of events deliberately. When far leftists come to power, they try to consolidate their grip on power at all costs.


Too funny. I fear people like you gaining power far more than any of what you have here.

Would your freedom of speech claim include "free speech zones" used by this admin to keep protesters miles away from Bush? Or maybe the prosecution of the protester at an airport by Strom Thurmonds son? Or is that OK because it's against someone on the left?

Suspension pf the Constitution is already happening. We'll have to see how the Supremes rule on that.

Thoght reform camps. Would that be Fox news?

Guns will not be taken away. I don't like guns much myself, but I will fight for my friends right to have them. I'm not sure you should have any though.

Your worst fear is a joke. The GOP has accomplished much of this in Congress already. Oversight is minimul, there is no input on legislation let alone negotiation. Even though the GOP platform in 2000 said that jerrymandering(sp?) was wrong, they have made a fine art of it including using Homeland security to find the dems in Texas.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
sparky
Former Member


Joined: 06 May 2004
Posts: 546

PostPosted: Tue May 18, 2004 4:54 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

You're killing me, Carpo! My sides are aching and I"m in stitches!

Nobody said the following:

Quote:
This is part and parcel of the left's sick ideology of blaming the U.S., and/or blaming the victims, for acts of terrorist barbarism. 9/11 was the U.S.'s fault, the beheading of Nick Berg was Bush's fault, the tortures of Saddam Hussein were the fault of the U.S., the suicide bombing in Israel is the Jews' fault, etc.


What nobody said:

Anything about "the jews"
9/11 was the U.S.'s fault
Saddam's tortures were the fault of the U.S.
Blaming the victims

Neither Berg nor the U.S. was responsible for his death: the terrorists were. To explain their motives isn't to absolve them of their guilt or place the blame on the victim, who had nothing to do with the prison torture or murders anyway.

In any tit-for-tat, the wrongdoer is still the wrongdoer. But that doesn't mean we shouldn't be aware that our tit can result in their tat. Indeed, we should be aware that when it comes to tit-for-tat terror, they're better at it.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
mikest
PO2


Joined: 11 May 2004
Posts: 377

PostPosted: Tue May 18, 2004 4:59 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

The only fault I heard assigned for 9/11 was Pat Robertson saying it was because of Gays and Feminists. Last I heard, he was on the Right. Has that changed?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
sparky
Former Member


Joined: 06 May 2004
Posts: 546

PostPosted: Tue May 18, 2004 6:50 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Nope, he's still on the right and still probably thinks God was punishing the US for not doing what Pat says. Welcome back, Mikest.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
mikest
PO2


Joined: 11 May 2004
Posts: 377

PostPosted: Tue May 18, 2004 7:22 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Fortdixlover

You forgot about the homosexual agenda of turning everyone gay. Is that going to happen in your scenerio as well?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
carpro
Admin


Joined: 10 May 2004
Posts: 1176
Location: Texas

PostPosted: Tue May 18, 2004 2:04 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

carpro wrote:
sparky wrote:
Quote:
Note how Sparky, jc and others seem to obsess on showing that the Spaniards changed their vote since "Anzar lied!!!!!"

This is part and parcel of the left's sick ideology of blaming the U.S., and/or blaming the victims, for acts of terrorist barbarism. 9/11 was the U.S.'s fault, the beheading of Nick Berg was Bush's fault, the tortures of Saddam Hussein were the fault of the U.S., the suicide bombing in Israel is the Jews' fault, etc.

Are these the Western values you know, or something else entirely?


That's silly. Nobody said any of that. Obviously our points are so irrefutable that you have to exaggerate or mischaracterize them to rebut them.

.


Let's see now. I believe the discussion was about it being the US's fault that Michael Berg was slaughtered because of the prison abuse. At least that's what the terrorists were claiming. And someone on this forum wrote:

"Berg was the first of the hostages to actually have been killed. The timing wasn't random and I believe the captors when they claim this as the reason for not murdering anyone else held captive until now. "

Seems like somebody did say it was the US's fault when they agreed with the killers. How about it, Sparky?

That's your quote.


Does that mean you deny that you wrote the above mentioned quote?
_________________
"If he believes his 1971 indictment of his country and his fellow veterans was true, then he couldn't possibly be proud of his Vietnam service."
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
mikest
PO2


Joined: 11 May 2004
Posts: 377

PostPosted: Tue May 18, 2004 6:19 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Stll waiting for answers to my questions.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
mikest
PO2


Joined: 11 May 2004
Posts: 377

PostPosted: Tue May 18, 2004 10:22 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
Would your freedom of speech claim include "free speech zones" used by this admin to keep protesters miles away from Bush? Or maybe the prosecution of the protester at an airport by Strom Thurmonds son? Or is that OK because it's against someone on the left?

Suspension pf the Constitution is already happening. We'll have to see how the Supremes rule on that.

Thoght reform camps. Would that be Fox news?

Guns will not be taken away. I don't like guns much myself, but I will fight for my friends right to have them. I'm not sure you should have any though.

Your worst fear is a joke. The GOP has accomplished much of this in Congress already. Oversight is minimul, there is no input on legislation let alone negotiation. Even though the GOP platform in 2000 said that jerrymandering(sp?) was wrong, they have made a fine art of it including using Homeland security to find the dems in Texas

Fortdixlover

You forgot about the homosexual agenda of turning everyone gay. Is that going to happen in your scenerio as well?.


Still waiting
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
mikest
PO2


Joined: 11 May 2004
Posts: 377

PostPosted: Thu May 20, 2004 6:20 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

48 hours and waiting.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
mikest
PO2


Joined: 11 May 2004
Posts: 377

PostPosted: Thu May 20, 2004 9:46 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Boy, that Fortdixlover really loves to avoid questions.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
mikest
PO2


Joined: 11 May 2004
Posts: 377

PostPosted: Fri May 21, 2004 2:26 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Looks like the coward from the 101st keyboard brigade is still MIA.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
mikest
PO2


Joined: 11 May 2004
Posts: 377

PostPosted: Fri May 21, 2004 11:43 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Hey fortdixcoward.The above questions have never baan answered by you. I realize that you think you are both funny and smart, but until you answer these you continue to be a coward and a hypocrite. Come on little boy show us that wonderfull intelect of yours.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
sparky
Former Member


Joined: 06 May 2004
Posts: 546

PostPosted: Fri May 21, 2004 11:54 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Mikest, it looks like fdl is going to stay in his foxhole on this one. He's hoping it goes away.

Carpo, I'll just repeat for you and add bolding to the important parts you left out.

What nobody said:

Anything about "the jews"
9/11 was the U.S.'s fault
Saddam's tortures were the fault of the U.S.
Blaming the victims

Neither Berg nor the U.S. was responsible for his death: the terrorists were. To explain their motives isn't to absolve them of their guilt or place the blame on the victim, who had nothing to do with the prison torture or murders anyway.

In any tit-for-tat, the wrongdoer is still the wrongdoer. But that doesn't mean we shouldn't be aware that our tit can lead to their tat. Indeed, we should be aware that when it comes to tit-for-tat terror, they're better at it.

But one person blaming Rumsfeld is Berg's father. He must know more than the rest of us.


Last edited by sparky on Sat May 22, 2004 12:00 am; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
hist/student
Lieutenant


Joined: 09 May 2004
Posts: 243

PostPosted: Fri May 21, 2004 11:57 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

unabashed comprehensive retraction

Last edited by hist/student on Fri Jul 23, 2004 11:34 pm; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
mikest
PO2


Joined: 11 May 2004
Posts: 377

PostPosted: Sat May 22, 2004 12:07 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

hist/student wrote:
Mikest those are no more questions then much of what he hear from the 9/11 commisions, grandstanding during the redundant theatrical performances presented in the open sessions.


I do gather you got issues though?

Queers, the Supreme court, alternative news outlets?

I can't quite connect the dots on that one, maybe you could get Moveon.com's poster boy Richard Clark to help you work thru your issues.


heh
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   This topic is locked: you cannot edit posts or make replies.    SwiftVets.com Forum Index -> Swift Vets and POWs for Truth All times are GMT
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3  Next
Page 2 of 3

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group