Quote of the day

Richard,

George Washington was not warning future Americans not to wage war on foreign soil, he was warning us not to adopt foreign, i.e.: European, values. Lord knows we sometimes have to fight our enemies in foreign lands, something my dad had to do in WWII.

Of course the United States is not an empire, we are a democratic republic, and we are the nemesis of totalitarian empires. America has defeated four empires: British, Nazi, Japanese and Soviet. Remember, Richard, an empire is lead by an unelected (or once elected) ruler, a ruler who holds total power - the power of life and death over all his subjects. Adolph Hitler was not going to be voted out of power, but if you are simply a good American citizen, and have some patience, you can vote out any sitting President at the next election - the peaceful and democratic transfer of power at the consent of the people, i.e.: the majority. Impatience in politics is a totalitarian instinct, and it leads to unjust and tyrannical governments - governments ruled by elite minorities - oligarchies or dictatorships.

Our entire disagreement hinges on whether this is a just or unjust war. War is just if it is in self-defense - in defense of sacred life and liberty. War is unjust if its purpose is conquest. The reason I believe this is a just war is that I see our enemies as part of a totalitarian religious/political movement. As Norman Podhoretz puts it in his book "World War IV: The Long War Against Islamofascism," Islamic terrorists and Middle Eastern tyrants have a common agenda and a common enemy. The agenda is the usual one: wealth and political power - and eventually conventional military power - concentrated in their hands. Their common enemy is the United States and Israel - countries with true liberty for their people. The link between Islamic terrorists and Middle Eastern tyrants is Sharia. Sharia is a totalitarian system of religion, politics and law, and that law trumps even the "secular" laws existing in the so-called secular Middle Eastern nations like Egypt, Libya, Syria, etc. This is a two-headed monster of terror and tyranny, and it has declared war on America, because it hates our God-given liberty. Sharia is the very essence of anti-liberty and it is the ultimate goal of both Islamic terrorists and Middle Eastern tyrants. Iraq, Iran, Syria, Saudi Arabia and Libya are perfect examples of this convergence of terror and tyranny - and other Islamic countries are headed that way as well - including Indonesia.

I am not downplaying innocent victims of war, I'm in agreement that this is a tragedy and every effort should be made to protect the innocent - and never target the innocent. Richard, you and I may someday become innocent victims of war - here in our own cities. The deaths of innocent civilians is a fact of life in every war in human history - your current objections are not going to change this basic fact of life. Our enemies are evil to the core - despite what you have said, they do target the innocent, and they murder the innocent - as on September 11, 2001 – and in hundreds of similar terrorist acts before and since. We killed many more innocent people during World War II than during this war - WWIV, but the alternative was to lose the war, and eventually suffer the reverse at the hands of our evil and tyrannical enemies. Ultimately the culpability for innocent war victims lies with those who begin an unjust war of terror or aggression, not those who wage war against the aggressor. In the case of Totalitarian Islam we have a new twist, we have the unholy convergence of a totalitarian religious movement with a totalitarian civil tyranny - a two headed beast. Don’t look to past wars for exact ways to engage our enemies in this war. Every world war is new and different in many respects from its predecessor. It will require not only great sacrifice, strength and courage to defeat this new enemy of liberty, it will require great creativity.

Storm-Rider,

I suggest you cease wasting your time trying to educate that imp, Richard. He is a liberal, only a psychologist can help with that mental disorder.

Storm-Rider

I still fail to see how fighting halfway around the world constitutes us fighting for our freedom. You say that you love following the beliefs of our Founding Fathers, yet you want us to get the support of the UN and to get involved in Foreign conflicts. Remember George Washington's farewell address? you know, the one that told America to stay out of the world's issues and focus on it's own? yeah, that one. How is Iraq our issue?

I find it funny how on one hand, you say that the deaths of Innocents is deplorable and a cause to go to war, and then you say that the deaths of Innocents as a result of the war is, though sad, not sad enough to justify ending the war.

Then you go on about how the innocents were killed by Terrorists, with absolutely no proof to back it up. For all you know, and for all the media is reporting, the US military could be taking a page out of Saddam's book, lining up the males and shooting them one-by-one.

You downplay the deaths of the Innocents, stating that, "They MAY have been terrorists!!".

I will not stand for a war that goes on for generations. is America the British Empire? we do not send our sons and daughters to die on foreign soil so that the people back home can grow wealthy. This is not a Monarchy, this is NOT a dictatorship. You say you fight for freedom and then institute the Draft to send us off to war.

Regardless of how Bad a man Saddam was, it is no justification for us to go to war. 85000 innocents dead in the first 5 years. And that's a conservative estimate. If you really want a biased, liberal estimate, try over a Million deaths.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ORB_survey_of_Iraq...

Saddam was supplied with arms and ammo by US!! his wars of aggression were funded by none other than the United States.

I dont even know why i am argueing with you anymore. it is pointless and all you do is spout the same "facts" and then state your opinions as if they were facts. Then, when you cannot prove my points wrong, you focus on ME. You make me, personally, seem a bad person, as misinformed. As if, somehow, you have a higher intelligence and you know more than i ever will be able to. That i should for some reason or another Bow Down to you and your viewpoint, because you obviously know more than me.

i'm getting angry now, i need to quit and settle down. I may post again today, i don't know.

Richard,

Wrong again: Saddam Hussein was a mass murder of his own people - he was at war with his own people. Saddam Hussein had many associations with terrorists and terrorist organizations, and he himself was in fact a terrorist. "Human Rights Watch and Amnesty International place the number of disappeared between 70,000 and 150,000." Add to that several million unnecessary human deaths and suffering from all his wars of aggression.

http://usinfo.state.gov/products/pubs/silenced/...

Richard, you just can't get your mind wrapped around one simple fact: Of those 85,000 Iraqi civilian deaths, almost all are at the hands of terrorists. Also, remember, this is an asymetrical war; and many of our enemies are in civilian clothes as they wage war. We are in a long war, it will go on for several generations, and the final tally of death and suffering will be very high in the end; but in the end we are fighting for our survival as a free country - we are fighting for our God-given life and liberty.

Zhann,

Excellent and well thought-out post - my compliments, and I agree with much of what you say.

Here's the rub: Traditionally, dating back to the Hebrew Bible, a religious community expected a tithe of 10% from the community in order to perform God's work for the disabled, the poor and the underprivileged. The state also expected about the same amount for its other administrative functions and for national defense. Jesus was more than wise when He said "Render unto Caesar that which is Caesar’s and render unto God that which is God's." Under socialism the state subsumes the role of God and will take the whole 20%. Under the full Monty of socialism, i.e.: communism, the state actually becomes a substitute for God, as Atheism is its official religion.

So, you are correct that we have a degree of socialism in America, and more so in Europe, but this socialism has become very corrupt. Power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely. American government has become too big and too powerful, thanks to socialism. Under the Democrats it will become much bigger and, therefore even more corrupt.

True conservatives, like me, and like our founders believed in keeping the power of government smaller and separate from the power and responsibilities of the church, and it meant that people helped their family and their neighbors through direct compassion and charity, or did so through their church, rather than through a massive and corrupt government bureaus as we now have.

Socialism, in this way violates the Constitutional principle of separation of church and state, as it has taken on many of the responsibilities of the church.

Storm-Rider

If you want to count the actual, reported, confirmed civilian deaths from violence, then that 84-85 thousand is a good Count. That is a British Government funded web site, and a well known count. However, especially in a country like Iraq, most people who die are not in hospitals, morgues, nor are they identified and named, nor are they reported by the Press. That 600,000 was from a national Survey, done by Iraqi's. I am more inclined to believe the one that is closer to the action, but that is just me.

But i'll assume that you are correct. 84000 deaths. i like how you focus on my numbers and not on my points, but that doesn't matter. Do you know how many civilians died in the Sep 11 attacks? do you remember? 2973.
July 7? 52 deaths
the Madrid Bombings? 191 deaths
if 84000 innocent civilians have died since the invasion of iraq, in 2003, that that is... what, 1834 days? including today, that is.
45.8 deaths per day.
45.8 Civilian deaths per day.

Our war on Terror is killing more civilians than the terrorists. And if it were Terrorists who were doing these killings, then why are we only hearing about it now? When Saddam was in power, 45 people weren't getting killed per day. it doesn't matter who the civilians were actually killed by, what matters is that the only reason they are getting killed in the first place is that the US Military is there.

If the Military wasn't there, 88000 people would still be alive today, including 4000 Americans.

It is important to understand the difference between Socialism and Communism. One can argue that Socialism is simply a predecessor of Communism, but this isn’t necessarily the case. All modern societies, USA and Muslim based included, have far reaching socialist programs. In the USA we can name many … Welfare, Unemployment, Social Security are some of the primary ones. Some smaller ones include government sponsored children’s programs and community outreach programs. The largest form of Socialism in America would have to be the Public School System. Socialism is simply trying to put the common people on an equal ground. It can be easily argued that Democrats are far more Socialistic in their goals than Republicans, but Republican’s too acknowledge the fact that without some degree of Socialism in society, society would crumble. Also, keep in mind that Socialist governments are in place throughout Europe, including but not limited to: England, France, Italy, Belgium, Sweden, Germany and Norway. Keep in mind, Labor Party is just another way of saying Socialist Party … they defend the working class.

Saying that I find “evil under everything American” holds as much water as saying that government officials are honest hard working people. Blind faith in government is to some degree very dangerous, with the exception of the military and its ardent supporters. Storm and Rudy, I applaud you for the simple fact that without people like you this country would have collapsed long ago. It is vitally important that our armed services are stocked with people like you who will follow the President to the depths of hell never questioning. Putting me in the army, or Richard, would be counter productive because try as I may, and I assume Richard as well, I would contest any order I disagreed with. People like me have no place in the armed services, but people like you two are exactly what the armed services need.

With that said, blind faith in armed combat is vital, but blind faith in domestic affairs is extremely dangerous. The current administration in its infinite genius cares nothing for the people who elected them. With a 70% disapproval rate, it is important for a government to try and fix the situation. Rather than doing that, however, our government is spitting on its people, passing laws that nobody wants … and more importantly vetoing laws that the people want. This is exactly what our Founding Fathers didn’t want. A Democracy is where the government represents the will of the people. Our current government is doing anything but that.

Lastly, I will reiterate my comment that this War on Terror is not a war on terror but simply a way for the President to make a little extra cash before he departs. Halliburton is, I am sure, a very fit company. I don’t think that it is having any trouble getting the job done. But, don’t you find it odd that the company that our Vice President was CEO of just before his presidency won over 70% of all Iraqi contracts? Doesn’t that raise an eyebrow just a little bit? You mean to tell me that there is so little competition in this market that Halliburton could have won so much of the contracts without the help of their ex-CEO? If you truly believe that, I honestly don’t know what to say. As for the brilliant George W, the only thing that this guy has done correctly throughout his entire term in office is made his friends and family EXTREMELY rich. Rich doesn’t even scratch the surface when it comes to the amount of money they all made. I am never going to say that selling Oil is illegal, but the way it is being sold is ridiculous on countless levels. The inception of OPEC created a monopoly for Oil, yet monopolies are illegal in a democratic society. Why is it, then, that no one says anything? Because this way the price of Oil can be controlled. Now, simply raising prices on Oil is impossible, you need to cause a disturbance and focus public attention on this disturbance. The longer the disturbance lasts, the more you can adjust the price of Oil. The current output of Oil in no way differs from the output of Oil before the “War on Terror”. Nothing has changed. These random words of “worry” to scare the public is done simply so that they can raise prices and no one will question. Please, think about this for a little bit before posting a response. What has changed since before the “War on Terror” with respect to Oil production? Iraq produces less, but Saudi Arabia makes up the slack. Iran hasn’t reduced its production at all. Russia now produces far more Oil. Why the price hike? The “War on Terror”, as I said before, is a distraction. It has nothing to do with Terrorists. The USA can’t possibly “Win” in Iraq, or in Afghanistan. At some point it will simply be decided that we “Won” and troops will slowly be phased out … but, nothing has changed. ... sorry for the LONG response.

If you tell a big enough lie and tell it frequently enough, it will be believed.
--- Adolf Hitler

Richard,

The Wikipedia reference that you cited regarding Iraqi civilian deaths since our 2003 invasion refers to a "study" done in the British medical journal "The Lancet." This "study" has been roundly criticized by many since it is based entirely on their "estimates." You bought into this bogus total of 600,000 because you haven't done the research. 600,000 violent Iraqi civilian deaths is a lie, and it was politically motivated.

There is an internet site which counts actual civilian violent deaths in Iraq, and their total is approximately 85,000 since 2003. I would venture to say that the vast majority of these murders were carried out by terrorists. All you have to do is read the paper or watch the news - this is not rocket science.

http://www.iraqbodycount.org/

Richard, don't repeat these lies any more. You are in the service of our enemies, and you have become their useful idiot. Not that you are not very intelligent, which you are, it is your moral understanding that is lacking. You have a high IQ, but a low MQ - just like Karl Marx.

And where/when did I ever claim to be a Christian?

I do listen to myself. I do think things through before and when I say or do them.

I never said I do not care about you. I said "No one cares about your opinions". If none of us cared about you we would not try and save you from the mental disorder that is liberalism.

As for revenge killing, how is killing a terrorist who is hellbent on blowing himself up to kill 1 US Soldier and 50 innocent CIVILIANS a justification of more evil???? Killing evil people PREVENTS them from further harming the innocent. That is the ugly REALITY, not that commy get along gang fantasy world you liberals like to imagine we live in. KIlling a terrorist to prevent him from TARGETING CIVILIANS is not evil, that is the duty of the strong, to protect the weak.

And in typical fashion, you completely ignore my question in your post. I asked how we are supposed to coexist with a group of people hellbent on converting, subjugating, or killin us.

That you whine about my comments that hurt your feelings further proves you have no clue on how this world works.. That and all the verbal smackdowns Storm-Rider lays on you.

Richard,

I appreciate your research on Wikipedia, however Igor Shafarevich, a Russian scholar, made this subject one of his life's work; and his conclusions are at odds with the veneer of research provided by Wikipedia.
Mr. Shafarevich found that the Cathars were violent, and they were in fact the enemy of Orthodox Christianity, and they rejected the Biblical God Himself. Like Socialists and Communists today, they were the enemy of the family. Igor Shafarevich, in his research, found that the Cathars were also hypocrites: "It seems that the appeal for communality of property was rather widespread among the Cathars, since it is mentioned in certain Catholic works directed against them. In one of these, for instance, Cathars are accused of demagogically proclaiming this principle while not adhering to it themselves: "You do not have everything in common. Some have more, others less.""

Socialism was been tried by medieval Christians and was a great failure. Our founding fathers were students of history and they were familiar with this, and that is why they rejected the ideas of Socialism in favor of the ideas of Liberty. Atheists tried Socialism in the twentieth century, and it led to the greatest episodes of enslavement of people and mass murders of people in history.

As for the superiority of economic Socialism, i.e.: Communism, you apparently have not read enough on this count as well – nor did you live through it as I have. The Soviet Union was a colossal experiment in economic Socialism, and it resulted in the enslavement of hundreds of millions of Russian workers, and the mass murder of tens of millions. Oh yes, they achieved economic equality all right - all poor people are equally poor. Economic Socialism was a failure because it deprived people of their God-given creativity. When you tax a man to the point of removing his motivation to work creatively, you have undercut his natural desire to work and be creative. This is equally true on the other end: When you give to able-bodies people that which they have not labored for, there is no longer a need to work or be creative. The great failure of economic Socialism (Communism) is that it flies in the face of our God-given human nature - it is the enemy of creativity its self.

Richard, you need to read the work of Mr. Shafarevich - it is far superior in depth of research and analysis to that of Wikipedia.

http://www.robertlstephens.com/essays/shafarevi...

Rudy, I have only two things left to say to you.

1st is that if there was a Draft, I would support our troops.
2nd is that you need to listen to yourself.
"No one cares about your opinions"
"9/11 happened BEFORE we went to Afghanistan and Iraq"
How is anything you are saying even REMOTELY Christian? saying that you don't care about someone and openly supporting Revenge killings. You say you are fighting evil, but all you are doing is Justifying more of it.

Storm-Rider

Those were interesting reads. I have to admit, i did not know about the Cathars, although i think you need to do a bit more research. Look up the Cathars on Wikipedia or some other, more recent, article. 1983 was a long time ago.

From Wikipedia, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cathars

"From the theological underpinnings of the Cathar faith there came practical injunctions that were considered destabilizing to the mores of medieval society. For instance, Cathars rejected the giving of oaths as wrongful; an oath served to place one under the domination of the Demiurge and the world. To reject oaths in this manner was seen as anarchic in a society where illiteracy was wide-spread and almost all business transactions and pledges of allegiance were based on the giving of oaths.

Sexual intercourse and reproduction propagated the slavery of spirit to flesh, hence procreation was considered undesirable. Informal relationships were considered preferable to marriage among Cathar credentes. Perfecti were supposed to observe complete celibacy, and separation from a partner would be necessary for those who would become Perfecti. For the credentes however, sexual activity was not prohibited, but the creation of children was strongly discouraged, resulting in the charge by their opponents of sexual perversion. The common English insult "bugger" is said to derive from "bulgar", the notion that cathars followed the "Bulgarian heresy" whose teaching entailed perverse sexual activities which skirted procreation.

Killing was abhorrent to the Cathars; so too the copulation that produced enslavement in matter. Consequently, abstention from all animal food except fish was enjoined of the Perfecti. (The Perfecti apparently avoided eating anything considered to be a by-product of sexual reproduction, including cheese, eggs, milk and butter.) War and capital punishment were also condemned, an abnormality in the medieval age. As a consequence of their rejection of oaths, Cathars also rejected marriage vows. Such was the situation, that when called before the Inquisition, one accused of Catharism needed only to show he was married and the case was immediately dismissed.

Such teachings, both in theological intent and practical consequence, brought upon the Cathars condemnation from religious and secular authorities as being the enemies of Christian Faith and of social order."

Honestly, i don't see how you can connect Socialism to Catharism. they are two distinct philosiphies.

Also, how can you connect Socialism, the first mention of which was in the 1800's, to something back in the 11th Century? it doesn't make any sense to me. Socialism is not about the destruction of the Individual, not any more than Democracy is. Socialism is simply the extension of Democracy into the Economy, as well as in the Government. I don't know what you are so afraid of.

The idea that Production should benefit people is not different from the idea that the Government should represent the people. The simple fact is that 10% of our population controlls 90% of the wealth. To put that into Perspective, we have about 300 Million people living in the US. 30 Million people own 90% of the wealth of 300 Million.

Would this Country be a Democracy if only 10% of our population could vote? Would it be The land of Equality and Justice that our Founding Fathers fought so hard for? Then why is it okay for 10% of the people in America to be rich, when the rest of us are poor? isn't that what We fought against Britan to keep from happening?

How can we truly have a Democracy when our Economy is still an Anarchy?

That is all well and good, Jesus DID teach those positive things. Now answer this rationally. HOW IN THE BLUE HELL are we to mutually cooperate and exist with people who want to convert us, enslave us or kill us???? You talk about equality and freedom, guess what? They are NOT tenets of islam. You either surrender to the will of allah, and his pedophile prophet (as a muslim, or a dhimmi subjugate) or you DIE. Why is that simple truth not penetrating your skull????? How many more incidents of terrorists targeting civilians do you need to see in the news, like the female suicide bomber who blew up a bunch of, YOU GUESSED IT, civilians?????? That is why I call you stupid. Because you choose to ignore the simple truth. Jesus was and is all that is GOOD, islam is EVIL. Those who tolerate evil in the name of mutual cooperation, are the ENEMY of good. No one here cares about your opinions and lies (600000 dead in Iraq??? That figure was shown to be inflated by libtards like you). As for the current Government getting us into war after war, if I recall, 9/11 happened BEFORE we went to Afghanistan and Iraq.

And you keep harping on about those 9 casualties in the same building with the terrorists. Funny, the media hasn't reported any civilians in that area when we struck. And you know DAMNED well the bleeding heart libs would be all over that chance at demoralizing our troops. I really wish there was a draft, so crybabies like you would either learn to be a real man or just leave the country you can't stop whining about.

Richard,

Socialism is not compatible with liberty because it requires a totalitarian government to impose economic equality. You are simply parroting the screwed-up ideas of Karl Marx. Our founding fathers believed in the equality of all people before God and the law, and equality of opportunity - not the Socialist/Communist goal of equality in economic result.

Christian Socialism was tried during medieval times by the "Cathars" in the eleventh through the thirteenth centuries followed by the "Free Spirits," and the "Apostolic Brethren" in the thirteenth century. Then the "Taborites" and the "Anabaptists" tried Christian Socialism in the fourteenth century. These movements had three things in common: forced economic equality, mass murder and communal sex. These Christian Socialist movements were in fact at war with the Christian Church and its morals and values.

http://freebooks.entrewave.com/freebooks/docs/a...

Alexander Solzhenitsyn had plenty of experience with Socialism. Listen to him before you go any further down this anti-American, anti-Christian and anti-Liberty path:

"Socialism seeks to reduce human personality to its most primitive levels and to extinguish the highest, most complex, and "God-like" aspects of human individuality. And even equality itself, that powerful appeal and great promise of socialists throughout the ages, turns out to signify not equality of rights, of opportunities, and of external conditions, but equality qua identity, equality seen as the movement of variety toward uniformity."

"The doctrines of socialism seethe with contradictions, its theories are at constant odds with its practice, yet due to a powerful instinct--also laid bare by Shafarevich--these contradictions do not in the least hinder the unending propaganda of socialism. Indeed, no precise, distinct socialism even exists; instead there is only a vague, rosy notion of something noble and good, of equality, communal ownership, and justice: the advent of these things will bring instant euphoria and a social order beyond reproach."

http://www.robertlstephens.com/essays/shafarevi...

I didn't way you are at war in a violent sense, but you are at war with American liberty in a political sense - a non-violent culture war - just as Karl Marx was not violent. The violent men on your side will wait in the wings, just like the Bolsheviks.

Now, i am Unamerican, UnChristian, and a Commie? nice. just remember, YOU brought religion into this, not me.

Romans 12, 14-20

Bless those who persecute you; bless and do not curse. Rejoice with those who rejoice; mourn with those who mourn. Live in harmony with one another. Do not be proud, but be willing to associate with people of low position. Do not be conceited.

Do not repay anyone evil for evil. Be careful to do what is right in the eyes of everybody. If it is possible, as far as it depends on you, live at peace with everyone. Do not take revenge, my friends, but leave room for God's wrath, for it is written: "It is mine to avenge; I will repay," says the Lord. On the contrary:
"If your enemy is hungry, feed him; if he is thirsty, give him something to drink. In doing this, you will heap burning coals on his head."
Do not be overcome by evil, but overcome evil with good

Storm-Rider, i laughed when you quoted that phrase. You know why i laughed? Because the person who quoted it is the same person who is applauding the deaths of 9 random people. People you don't even know. You, not me, love death. You, not me, Love war. Does this not mean, according to yourself, that you Hate God?

And don't forget Jesus himself, saying, in Matthew 5:9 "Blessed are the Peacemakers, for they will be called Sons of God"
i could go on and on, pointing out such verses as Romans 5:1, not to mention many others.

I am not at war with traditional Americans. I am not at war with anyone. I believe that only through mutual cooperation, equality, Freedom, and trust can we truly attain peace. All of my morals and values are derived from Christ Jesus, and it is because of the teachings of Christ Jesus that i am Socialist. Socialism is the system of Government that most closely follows the peace and equality teachings of Jesus.

Tell me where in the bible Jesus says things like, "Kill those who disagree with me". or "I have no problem calling a stupid person stupid." Jesus loved, Forgave, accepted, and died for EVERYONE. Even those Islamists who you are so ready to kill.

And Storm-Rider, i enjoyed reading your earlier post as well. I have to tell you, calling me names really does a lot to refute my points. It may even prove me wrong better than actual arguements! Go You!

You also seem to base your whole arguement around the fact that those 9 people, May have been terrorists. Gone is the whole, "Innocent until Proven Guilty" idea, that those people you hold so highly, our Founding Fathers, came up with. Might as well say that the 600,000 people killed in Iraq is a Good thing. That's right. SIX HUNDRED THOUSAND.

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

The fact that our military does not target civilians is worthless. The fact is that in war, More innocents die than do Combatants. The Military may not target them, but they do kill them. and if it is worth it to the military to sacrifice 9 civilians to kill one terrorist... well... i don't even know.

What is this about World War 2? We fought in Tunisia and most of Africa because they were being controlled by the Italians and Germans. Iraq is not being controlled by Iran, nor was Afghanistan. And, as of now, we are not at war with Iran. And i'm not even going to comment on your "World War" comments.

Then you go on about how America is in a struggle for it's Existance as a free nation. And i couldn't agree more. The current Government gets us into war after war, and impliments restriction after restriction on our freedoms. If we are not careful, we will no longer be a free country. Heck, even Hitler was nice enough to ASK the German people for their Rights. Bush is just taking them.

I don't know how you got from Freedom of speech to accusing me of being a terrorist, but it probably makes sense to you. Have fun with that.

Rudy, with respect to my use of the word "Bullshit", i was, first off, quoting someone else. And secondly, i was not calling you Bullshit. I was not calling you stupid, nor was i calling you or anyone else names. I was calling Bullshit on the idea that the troops in Iraq and Afghanistan are fighting for Freedom.

I also find it funny how you guys just pat yourselves on the back all the time. "The beauty of being on the Right is knowing we ARE right"

i cant stop laughing at that one.

Storm-Rider,
I could not agree more :) The beauty of being on the Right is knowing we ARE right. I wonder how come muslims never ask why is it they continually lose to Israel, over the last 60 years, despite their repeated calls for allah to destroy the Holy Land????

Rudy,

The American Atheist/Socialist is at political war with the traditional American who adheres to Judeo-Christian morality and worldview - which we inhereted from our founding fathers and which is reflected in the Declaration of Independence.

These people have one thing in common with our Islamist enemies, with whom we are engaged in both a political and a kinetic war: Both groups hate the Biblical God - they are "Theophobic;" and they hate us because we adhere to the morlaity and values which derive from the God of the Bible.

The God of the Bible says it this way in the book of Proverbs: "All those who hate me love death."

I haven't read a better description of the Islamist or the Communist.

Storm-Rider,

Thank you for pointing out what I did not feel like wasting my breath on. Those two libtards accuse me of having a problem with name-calling. Honestly, I have no problem whatsoever calling a stupid person stupid. Richard is a commie, look at the title of his blog 'socialist-essays'. Zhann is simply one of those whiners who is going to complain because liberals have no real power, which drives them insane. The weaker they get, the more noise they make. Think of an animal in the wild, in the throes of death, and that is a liberal today. Also, I would like for Zhann to point out my subtle profanities, and name calling. Funny, he has no problem with Richard saying "bullshit"...

Richard
1. “Yes, and hopefully the nine innocents aren’t forgotten.”

Those people are unlikely to be innocent if they are in the same building with terrorists who are having a secret meeting designed to target and kill our troops, or target and murder innocent civilians. Occasionally innocent people are killed by our military action, but it is the terrorist who will answer to God and to his fellow man for this, for they use the innocent as human shields. They target the innocent - our military does not. They are evil, not our military; and, Richard, the failure to distinguish good from evil is either unforgivably foolish, or is its self an act evil.

2. “And i’m sorry, but you are wrong. Terrorists do not target Civilians. Civilians are simply collateral damage….Terrorist Attack Civilians. That does not mean they Target civilians. There is a difference.”

Richard, you are an anti-American liar. Lying in regards to issues of murder, wars of aggression or terror, rape, coercion, etc. is its self an act of evil.

3. “And yes, i believe Iraq is an immoral war.…i do not believe that there is any reason whatsoever for America to stomp around the world, acting like Iran’s Morality Police, imposing our views and overthrowing regimes, Invading countries and Killing people….MAYBE if they had verified nuclear weapons and were threatening to blow us up with them.”

America is not “stomping around the world.” Your weak metaphors are an insult to my intelligence. America is fighting World War IV – the Cold War was World War III. Whether Iraq has or had nuclear weapons is not the real issue – the only issue is where are our enemies – the enemies of our life and liberty. Wherever they are we are empowered by the morality of self-defense of our sacred liberty to wage war against them, and we don’t need anyone’s permission slip – including the UN. Taking out Saddam Hussein in Iraq was good military strategy, as this puts Iran in a nut-cracker. Similar military strategy to hedge in Nazi Germany was used by the United States during WWII when we invaded Tunisia, Algeria and Morocco – nations who had no hand in Pearl Harbor, and who had no WMD programs.

4. “I say: Bullshit. The troops in Iraq and Afghanistan are not fighting for my freedom. They are fighting to keep the world safe for petroleum.”

The United States is in a struggle, not just for its physical survival, but for its existence as a free nation. Our enemies want peace, just as Hitler wanted peace – they want us to have peace under their tyranny and terror. Patrick Henry, and our other founding fathers understood that there are only two alternatives for free men: Peace Under Liberty -- or -- Death. Peace under tyranny or terror is not an option for me – I’ll die a free man one way or the other. Richard, you are an anti-American bullshitter.

5. “If I were in an airport, and I spoke aloud what I’ve written in this article, I’d likely be detained or arrested.”

That is not true, and you know it – you would only be arrested if you tried to smuggle a gun or a knife or a bomb on an airplane, or if you spoke threats to the ground crews, air crews or passengers. By the way Richard, would you try any of that? Again, Richard, you are a liar – and lying in these matters of American national security and defense of our God-given liberty is its self an act of evil.

Zhann
1. “The war in Iraq, as Richard already claimed, has little to do with freedom and much to do with Profit….Iraq was attacked for one reason and one reason only … Money!”

Like Richard, you are encouraging our wartime enemies by publically lying about the United States of America. Would anyone in your family have said that the war in Tunisia, Morocco and Algeria was about money and profit during WWII? Last time I checked selling and buying oil was not immoral – selling and buying things, or bartering dates back to the origin of the human species. If you really think Halliburton is evil and somehow unqualified to perform their overseas job, please request a congressional investigation – I’d like to see the results. It’s funny how you and Richard find evil under everything American, but nary such a word for those bastards who are at war with us – I mock you both and would laugh in your face – and so would my father, God rest his soul, who sure as hell knew evil when he found it. Since you two are probably not Islamists, I’d bet you two are Socialists/Communists, and that would explain your hatred of, and lies about America.

2. “These laws give the government far too much power to control the American people,”

The only people that I can think of who wish to unjustly control the American people are our totalitarian Islamist enemies and Socialists/Communists. In the Declaration of Independence it says that just government power derives from the consent of the governed. That means that the American majority, through their elected representatives, gets to decide what are our laws, our public policy and our war policy - through the democratic process. If you want to change the laws and public policy now in effect regarding our just war against totalitarian Islam, vote or run for office. My suspicion is that you and Richard and the other leftist/socialists would dearly love to control the American people – and you would do it without our consent.

3. The government is playing kids games with the population, and the people are falling for it. “War on Terror” is a meaningless phrase.

It would take me a long time to come up with a lie like this which would encourage our enemies more that this one. The war on terror should be renamed to World War IV.

Richard, for a young guy you definitely have a head on your shoulders, I wish you the best of luck in the future.

Rudy, you truly do have a problem with name calling. You should work on a more argumentative approach. You like to post, and you have a strong opinion, this is very good. But, once you resort to subtle profanities your credibility is lost and you are looked at as low class. Only fools use profanities to prove a point.

To business: The war in Iraq, as Richard already claimed, has little to do with freedom and much to do with Profit. Cheney's visit to Iraq is business. His friends at Halliburton need his support to keep their contracts going. Just curious, but do either Rudy or Storm-Rider believe that the Halliburton contracts were legitimately won? How much money do you think they kicked back to Cheney for them? Bush, on the other hand, with his Oil connections was hoping to cash in on Iraqi oil. Fortunately for Iraq, Bush isn't too bright so his plans failed miserably. Regardless, enough oil is moving out of Iraq to put a few pennies in Bush’s pocket as well

Richard also brought up a good point that I have been waiting a long time to see come up on this site. Why is it that no one on this site mentions that the freedoms that this Iraqi war is supposedly fighting to protect are being eroded by our wonderful president? The fact that if someone is 'suspected' of terror, they can be arrested without warrant, their house and belonging can be seized without warrant, phones are now always under surveillance, phone companies are immune to lawsuits … and great deal more. Doesn't anyone here understand how easy it is to abuse this power? Do people really trust the government that much? Doesn't anyone remember what Clinton did with the White House cabinet without nearly so much power? These laws give the government far too much power to control the American people, but no one says anything. Even the media is relatively quiet about it. ALL governments are corrupt!! No one becomes president for a $400k/year salary. The amount of bribes and kickbacks the president receives puts Bill Gates to shame.

Everyone is entitled to their opinion. However, there is far too much disillusionment going on in this country. The government is playing kids games with the population, and the people are falling for it. "War on Terror" is a meaningless phrase. There is a War, yes ... but it has little to do with Terror. The only thing it has succeeded in doing so far in relation to Terror is cause more Terror.

Lastly, Saddam Hussein was a madman. There is no denying this. However, how many madmen are running countries now? What about North Korea? Kim is a complete nut case. I don't even want to discuss African nations, what happens there is crazy on a whole different level. It is illogical to say that the USA attacked Iraq to remove a mad dictator, there are too many of those in the world and we can't attack all of them. Iraq was attacked for one reason and one reason only ... Money!

Rudy.

Terrorist Attack Civilians. That does not mean they Target civilians. There is a difference. Terrorists Target Terror. The death of civilians is simply the easiest way to make peopel afraid. That's all there is to it.

And yes, i believe Iraq is an immoral war. Although i do not believe in the things Saddam did, and though i strongly disagree with the tactics he used, i do not believe that there is any reason whatsoever for America to stomp around the world, acting like Iran's Morality Police, imposing our views and overthrowing regimes, Invading countries and Killing people. There is no reason for us to do this, and i cannot think of any reason that is good enough to provoke something like this. MAYBE if they had verified nuclear weapons and were threatening to blow us up with them. but they dont, so we are good.

This is not Germany, Rudy. This is not Prussia, this is not Austria-Hungary. I do not Worship the US Military. I do not support our troops, and i do not support the War. DissidentVoice.org put it especially well, saying,

"There are two powerful myths/ironies propping up the "support the troops" premise. The first involves what they are doing in Iraq and Afghanistan in the first place. I can't tell you how many e-mails I've received over the years that read something like this: "While you sit at home in your luxurious apartment, making money off your writing (insert laugh track here), those brave men and women are putting their asses on the line to fight for your freedom to write your anti-American garbage.

I say: Bullshit.

The troops in Iraq and Afghanistan are not fighting for my freedom. They are fighting to keep the world safe for petroleum. If anything, since 9/11, our freedom has been slowly eroded and the presence of the US military in Iraq and Afghanistan makes it harder for anyone to speak up in dissent. If I were in an airport, and I spoke aloud what I've written in this article, I'd likely be detained or arrested."

People died in the Revolutionary War, the War of 1812, the Civil War, World War 2, and just a few others for Freedom. The rest of the wars we fought have been for profit. The Mexican-American war, the Spanish-American war, Desert Storm, Iraqi Freedom, all of these have been for profit, land, or the Protection of American Financial Institutions. And i do not support our troops when they choose to fight in a war for profit.

And i'm not even going to comment on your last paragraph. you seem to descend into name-calling more and more when you cant prove me wrong with actual points.

Storm-Rider

This is America. this is the land of the free, and yet our government continues to impose Wiretaps and unwarranted searches-and-seizures. This is the Home of the Brave, and yet we are fighting a war against a country that is smaller than us, weaker than us, and no threat to us at all. Heck, we are LOSING against them, for goodness sake.

I love america because it is where i was born. I love america because it allows me to speak out against it. I love america because of the promise of a better future. unfortunately, America rarely seems to deliver on it's promises.

I Would not die for America. But i would Gladly die for the people of America.

Storm-Rider

I thank your father for his service, and will honor his memory. It is because of men like him, that Richard is free to be a coward and hide behind his rhetoric. And it is because of him, that someone like me, the son of legal immigrants, was able to achieve the American Dream, and not grow up speaking German. I will not forget their sacrifice. Nor will my offspring, when I have them.

I'm back now - I actually have a real life - this is a distraction.

You're doing a good job trying to educate Richard on the reality of this war against totalitarian Islam - an asymmetrical war which will in the not too distant future become nuclear/biological. This war is just because it is in defense of our sacred life and liberty. The failure to defend life and liberty is both unjust, cowardly and immoral. My father defended American life and liberty on the islands of Saipan and Tinian in World War II - he engaged in combat so brutal that it caused him to have nightmares for many years. The price of life and liberty is blood, suffering and sacrifice - same as before - same as with our founding fathers. It isn't over by a long shot - there will be a great deal of opportunity in the future for both courage and patriotism on the one hand, and cowardice and subversion on the other - we will see both. God love and defend the former, and God damn the latter.


Richard,

Back to George Orwell. I agree with Mr. Orwell that Nationalism is wrong. To me it means "my country right or wrong." American Patriotism, on the other hand, means I love this country because of its commitment to life, liberty and pursuit of happiness for its people - that is always and forever right and never wrong. This has made America very different from most other countries, and particularly those who hate us because we are free and strong.

My son is also 17 years old.

Richard,

Your being annoyed is of no consequence to me. I don't care about hurt feelings. you complaing about my namecalling, then label "immature republicans" in your school. Respect is EARNED, not given. And you are in the red, in that department. You ask me to prove you wrong with facts, which I have done, and you continue to ignore them. My previous posts contain FACTS, DATA and REASON. Your quote of the day was "Terrorists do not target civlians. Civilians are collateral damage.". I refuted that with 9/11, 3/11, 7/7 and you can find well over 10000 terror attacks on civilians if you look hard enough. In your reply just now, you said "You are correct. They choose to attack civilians for the shock value." Which statement do you want to stand by? They don't target civilians, or they do? You cannot have it both ways.

As for being un-American, you are free to disagree with the government. I do it all the time. It is a guaranteed right fought for by men better than you and me. Calling Iraq an immoral war is pretty weak. Would you then claim that leaving Saddam Hussein in power to further exterminate the Kurds, oppress the Shia, and violate 17 UN Resolutions was moral? Please enlighten us on why you think the war in Iraq is immoral, and back it up with FACTS, DATA, and REASON, not "oh it's immoral because it makes me feel bad".

Thinking back to the days after 9/11, I had to fly several times that same month, and in October, for my job. People were nervous on those flights, but unafraid. Most people I talked with had the mindset of the brave passengers of Flight 93. If someone tries to hi-jack this flight, they die.

I work in the Middle East. I see firsthand what people here are capable of, both good and bad. That is why I said you don't know what you are talking about. Where have you travelled? Have you spent time in the Middle East? How many times have you had to have your passport refilled then replaced?

Now, about my Mother. I don't know what that has to do with anything, your hypothetical what-ifs are irrelevant for two reasons. First, my mom would be dead before she let some coward take her hostage. She would fight until either she or her attacker was dead. That is assuming I was not around to eliminate the threat. She is not a blubbering coward who would beg for her life. Second, we see hostages taken all the time, and law enforcement does not sacrifice the hostage. They negotiate with the hostage taker, and talk him down, or let a sniper drop him. I don't think I have ever heard of a hostage situation where the Police/Military said "sacrifice them both", but would love for you to take your own advice and provide an example of that ever having occured, in the US, or any Western Country. If you have an example, please provide it.

Rudy,

To be honest, I am getting kind of annoyed reading your posts. You seem to be under the impression that by calling me stupid and pointing out when I spell words wrong, you can somehow stop me from believing what I do. You call me names, say that I am misinformed, and call me ignorant, when I have done nothing but refute your points while respecting you as a person. Though I have come to expect it from the immature republicans at my High School, I would expect that someone like you would actually make an attempt at respect. I was wrong, apparently.
I am 17 years old. I am White, I Live in a small Farm town in Illinois, and I have left the US on a few occasions. I was hoping that my age doesn’t matter in an argument such as this, where it is Morals and Motives we are arguing. I would prefer if you focus on proving my points wrong with a little better argument than, “you really have no clue what you are saying, and you simply talk because you like the sound of your own voice”. Please. Prove me wrong. Use Data, Facts, and Reason, as opposed to simple name calling and “you are so young, you cannot know what you are talking about”. Next, you will be saying that I am a disgrace to America because I refuse to fight in an immoral war, or I am un-American because I disagree with the Government. I’ve heard it all before, it is nothing new.
Now that I just spent 2 paragraphs on a totally useless and irrelevant topic, I will start to refute your actual points.
You are correct. They choose to attack civilians for the shock value. That is what I have been saying all along. They attack civilians to make us afraid, to shock us into submission. You have just agreed with me, thank you. And think back to the months following September 11th: there were fears about flying on planes, and for the next few years airlines were in financial trouble. People were afraid of Flying. And the reason you do not know anyone who is afraid to leave their home is because we, in America, do not live in the Middle East. We do not have a problem with Suicide Bombers and rockets flying through our windows. Go to Palestine or Israel, Afghanistan or Iraq, and I’m sure it will be a different story. The simple fact is that we have an ocean between The US and the Middle-East. Then you call me a moron and a crybaby for feeling sorry for 9 random people who were killed, without reason, for simply being in the same house as a wanted man. If a known ringleader of a Terrorist Organization was hiding in a School, would you say that the deaths of the children in the school were an acceptable loss in exchange for the death of the Terrorist? What about if it was your family? If the Terrorist was holding your Mother hostage, would you give the Okay for Swat teams to take them both out, because the Sacrifice of one Human is, though regrettable, still worth the death of a Terrorist?
I guess that is simply a moral issue that is between you and Whatever God you believe in (if you do). But my class period is ending now, I will continue to respond later, when I have a better block of time in which to write and respond. Have a good day, and try not to get to pissed off, okay?

Zhann,

Claiming that Palestinians have nothing is ignorant. The US gives them more aid than any Arab country, in fact today I saw an article on a $150 million dollar handout we gave them. But they will spend the money on more rockets, then claim they have no money for food, shelter and medical care. Their claim for being ripped from their homes by Israelis is taqiyya. They left because the Arabs promised they would sweep the Jews into the Mediterranean, and then give them all of Israel. Apparently Allah either loves the Jews more than the muslims, because Israel survives to this day, or he is completely incompetent as a deity. The reason terrorism occurs is not because of American Foreign Policy, or Israeli response to Palestinian terrorists. It is because islam is a cult founded in violence, subjugation and intolerance. Look at my previous comments in this section about all the countries islam invaded, and empires and cultures islam destroyed.
Terror is their new weapon in the quest to make islam the only religion on earth, since they know they cannot do it with military might alone.

Richard, once again your ignorance shines through. The very reason terrorists continue to target civilians is because they know they are no match for the military forces of civilized countries. That is why they choose civilian targets. The shock value. It is INTENTIONAL. Get that through that thick skull and into your puny brain. I personally do not know anyone who is afraid to leave their home, go to a market, or board a plane, and that is because they know there are security measures in place. And because they know there are REAL MEN and REAL WOMEN who are willing to sacrifice so that morons like you can come on blog sites and cry and bitch about 9 people killed along side a terrorist, in a terrorist camp.

Your argument about accidental death is irrelevant, everyone dies, accidents happen, and while sad they are part of the natural order of the world. Terrorism is not.In muslim countries women are killed every day on mere suspicion of wrongdoing, by their own family members. You obviously have been listening too much to the mainstream media. For that there is no cure but opening your eyes and your ears. You say the 9 foreigners were collateral damage, without having any facts on their ID's. It was a known terrorist training facility that was hit. Gee, who are the most likely people to be in a terrorist training camp? I wonder...

You say we keep changing and letting them win. How is preventing repeat attacks letting them win? That is like saying an NFL team is letting their opponent win because they adjust their defense to stop the other's offense. Moronic, and juvenile argument at best, on your part. You have obviously never had to fight for anything. Would you not defend your home if there was a string of break ins and burglaries in the neighborhood? Or would buying a gun to shoot an intruder change who you are and let them win? Changing security procedures in airports does not change who we are as a people. It provides a better chance of us not being hit by terrorists. It's called a deterrent. You only see in the media the attacks that are successfully carried out overseas. Your dumb ass knows nothing of the ones the governments stop, and do NOT report to the lame stream media, because the media would only use it to further demoralize our soldiers.

And yes, the Crusades were also about Catholics fighting amongst themselves. But try googling 'Moors' and you will see that they did in fact invade Europe, and North Africa, which you completely ignore. By doing that it shows you don't do any research, you just regurgitate the same tripe the media feeds you. How old are you? Have you ever even left the United States? Do you know anything about what it's like in the countries where islam has taken over? Or are you so entrenched in your little bubble that you have only your holier than thou moral equivalence. You also misspelled 'forte', and ending your statement with 'but whatever' goes to show you really have no clue about what you are saying, that you simply talk because you like the sound of your own voice.

It seems pointless for me to join in the fray here, primarily because it seems that Richard has made his point quite clearly. It is important to keep in mind why terrorism occurs. Nobody that is happy with their life and the world they live in will simply blow themselves up. The vast majority of Palestinians that have taken this action were people that had nothing, or worse yet people that watched as everything they had, including friends and family, got ripped out of their lives by Israelis. These people feel that their only means of satisfaction is to get back at Israel any way they can. For a better understanding, read some blogs posted by Muslims, or better yet Palestinians.

Anyone that blows himself up, or any other form of terror, is completely worthless in my eyes. Violence has never solved anything; it only shuts people up for a short time. With that said, by trying to decimate Arab nations, and Muslims in general, we are simply strengthening their fervor. We are doing nothing to stop the terror; we are simply shaking the bees nest.

Rudy,

I appreciate your honesty, and i thank you for actually reading my post. I have the feeling that Storm-Rider didn't actually read what i wrote.. But i need to disagree. The purpose of those attacks was not to kill the civilians. It helped, but that was not the purpose. Saying that the purpose of Terrorist attacks is the death of civilians is like saying that the purpose of turning on the Computer is to use up electricity. It is the end to the means.

The purpose of terrorism is, to be quite honest, to cause terror. They attack transportation to make people afraid of travel. They attack stores to make people afraid of crowded places. They attack bridges to make people afraid of driving. And they attack our marketplaces to make us afraid to leave our homes.

And we keep changing. We keep letting them win. We say we are winning because of a rising head count. We say we are winning because the number of Middle-Eastern Civilians now outnumbers the number of Western Civilians dead. but we keep changing our lifestyle in reaction to attacks that, in all probability, will never happen to us. You are WAY more likely to be killed by drowning in your toilet than by a terrorist. about 2 children die every day from being CIRCUMCISED! over the last 10 years, more innocents have died from getting the extra skin around their penis cut off than by crazy people driving planes into buildings.

Is it tragic? yes. Should we try to prevent it from happening in the future? yes. but we should not change who we are because of the remote chance that some madman might kill us. because if we do change who we are, we let them win.

Yes, those 9 foreigners were collateral damage. but it doesn't change the fact that their deaths were not caused by some crazed madman with a bomb strapped to his chest. They were caused by a Modern, Western government that claims to be FIGHTING terror, not causing it.

And really? the Crusades?? honestly? (i was only aware of the fact that the Catholic church decided that they didn't like the fact that Catholics fought more amongst themselves and decided to give them a common enemy to fight.) that really isn't my fortay, but whatever.

Storm-Rider,

Why would you call Richard intelligent and say we could use him on our side when he either is grossly misinformed and uneducated, or a flat out liar regarding terrorists targeting civilians? I hope that was sarcasm :P

Richard,

I read your full comment on the subject of collateral damage. Terrorists DO target civilians. Who the **** do you think was in the World Trade Center's North and South Towers??? Those were CIVILIANS. THEY WERE INNOCENT, going about their lives until terrorists TARGETED CIVILIANS and killed them. Or perhaps the 3/11 Madrid Train Station, terrorists once again TARGETED CIVILIANS. And again on 7/7 in the London Subway, terrorists TARGETED CIVILIANS. Or the shoebomber Richard Reid? Correct me if I am wrong, but that airliner was full of CIVILIANS he TARGETed.

By your definition then, those 9 foreigners in Pakistan are collateral damage. You truly have illustrated either your blatant ignorance, or your unwillingness to see the truth.

And about Iran, the CIA taking out one government head is NOT the cause of terrorism, islam is. Islamic doctrine calls for forced conversion, subjugation or killing of all infidels. PERIOD. Ever wonder what the REAL reason for the crusades was? It was response to the muslims invading and taking over Spain and Portugal, and penetrating into France, which is why many words in Spanish and Portuguese (I speak both fluently) are of Arabic origin. Not to mention them overrunning Egypt, Libya, Tunisia, Algeria, Morrocco, Western Sahara and Mauritania. But of course that was in retaliation for American foreign policy, according to you leftist kooks.

Hey Richard

Thanks for the compliment. I actually did mean to compliment you as well, because there is no doubt in my mind that you are a very smart man. We could use a guy like you on our side, and I believe you and I could actually become friends in that event.

You know, Richard, it is difficult for a grown man to change his mind and his heart, but it is not impossible. I believe a person’s MQ is subject to change in an instant. It can change so suddenly that the earth can be felt to move underfoot - a paradigm shift in the heart and the mind. It is impossible, however to increase one’s IQ at our stage of life - something for which you can either be grateful to God or to the great big bang in the sky.

Storm-Rider

That has to be the most well thought out and well written, "you are such an idiot" comment i have ever recieved. and George Orwell! you used one of my own against me. That was pretty good. Of course, he is the same person that said such brilliant things as, "The Catholic and the Communist are alike in assuming that an opponent cannot be both honest and intelligent." and, "The nationalist not only does not disapprove of atrocities committed by his own side, but he has a remarkable capacity for not even hearing about them"

And i also urge you to look at this website, if you truly believe that they started the Hatred and Lies, that The Radical Muslims just woke up one morning and said, "I think we will kill Americans today"
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/robert-naiman/if-...

I also like how you did nothing to refute my points, only proceeding to call me an idiot, albeit in very fancy language. You are going to refute me by pointing out that i hold myself to a different set of Morals than you. Congradulations.

And i'm not even going to respond to the last paragraph. I never claimed to be smart, or intelligent. you thrust that label onto me. but i will ask you this:

Is it possible to be both Secure AND Free? At what point does Giving up Freedoms in the name of Security become the Immoral thing to you?

Richard,

Wow, you are so sophisticated - so much so that have become a fool. People like you remind me of something that George Orwell once said: “There are some ideas so wrong that only a very intelligent person could believe in them.”

The Islamo-fascists did start it, just like the Nazi’s started it in the twentieth century. They started it, and we’ll finish it with their total defeat. There is no moral equivalence between those who murder and engage in wars of aggression and terror, and those who defend their lives and their liberty. That may be too simple an idea for your great intellect, but the question is not how smart you are - what your IQ is; but rather what is your moral quotient. Like other intelligent fools, your moral quotient is low - you can’t tell right from wrong.

As for your mind-numbing analysis of the shoe-bombing terrorist, we are simply in a new kind of war; and we must adjust our defense against this new asymmetrical threat in whatever way is most likely to work best for us - our safety and our liberty. With your superior intellect though, it is probably just a simple matter of you calling the DHS or the DOD or the President himself and letting them know how you’ve figured it all out. My family and I will be able to sleep much better - will you please make the call?