Act of Terrorism in Boston

[QUOTE=RoadToad;512972]I didn't mean to presume to say that "a majority of Americans think like I do." That's pretty arrogant. But there was a time when conservatives could claim to hold a "silent majority," and those days are over. American demographics are changing, and the conservative Republican viewpoint, while it does dominate this forum, is now in the minority, or if not it soon will be (I think it already is, but I guess I can hardly claim to be neutral, can I?).[/QUOTE]
--
Wouldn't it be kind of entertaining to see what government programs the so called conservatives who spout stuff like "drink the cool aid" actually take advantage of, I live in an agricultural area and I hear this stuff on certain days, other days they are chatting about government crop insurance, other days they are building fence and saying how much Uncle Sam is helping them out because of some kind of disaster relief, a minute later someone walks by whom everybody believes might be one of these "cool aid drinkers" and the conversation changes to how those people are ruining the country.

[QUOTE=jcb;512967]Actually, the "narrative" I described has not been changed one iota. It's the truth. As confirmed by that totally biased source, the Senate Intelligence Committee, Bob Woodward's book, interviews with the major players, and countless other sources.

Regardless of the eventual outcome in Iraq and the Middle East, that outcome cannot change the fact that the U.S. people were duped into supporting the invasion.

(and who exactly thought Hitler and Stalin were awesome in 1939...???)[/QUOTE]

[url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Time_Person_of_the_Year]Time Person of the Year - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia[/url]

The WORLD.

Later,

Geo.

[QUOTE=apb;512971]Umm, actually, it was not the ENTIRE WORLD that believed or was involved. That is you changing the narative, again.

Other than Hilter and Stalin themselves, I'm not sure who viewed those two as the greatest thing since apple pie. In fact, right after the German defeat in WWII, Patton got in some trouble for suggesting we continue on to Moscow next. Please provide at least some real data to back up your claims.
Andrew[/QUOTE]

OK............TIRED of arguing with you.

* The UN Security council voted........unanimously.
* IRAQI scientists stated it was true.
* Yellowcake Uranium was shipped out by the UNITED STATES to Russia.
* American Soldiers are on RECORD
* Weapons used in Syria on CIVILIANS........were produced in IRAQ. Hard to find that on the web, I wonder why. Reuters reported it, but you will never find it.

* Take a look a the wiki-leaks information.........be careful so you don't end up on a watchlist though :) LOTS of crap not being told to the American Public about shipments of material into Syria.......Not too easy to find......you need to know how to look...but you can find it.

My LAST words on it.

Believe what you want.

OH, and Time Magazine had Hitler as Man of the Year in 38 and Stalin in 39..........

Get your head out of the sand.

Later,

Geo

[QUOTE=GeoFisher;512975][url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Time_Person_of_the_Year]Time Person of the Year - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia[/url]

The WORLD.

Later,

Geo.[/QUOTE]

According to the article, The Time Man of the Year Award went to the person who had the most effect on the news, not the most worthy.

[QUOTE=GeoFisher;512975][URL="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Time_Person_of_the_Year"]Time Person of the Year - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia[/URL]

The WORLD.

Later,

Geo.[/QUOTE]

Geo, sometimes I wonder if you're just trolling me and are secretly laughing when I respond to posts like the one above.

Time did indeed name Hitler their "Man of the Year" in 1938. As they did for Stalin a year later and for Iran's Ayatollah Khomeini in 1979. That's because the award is given to the person who, "for better or for worse, ...has done the most to influence the events of the year."

The accompanying article on Hitler called him "ruthless," took him to task for re-arming Germany "to the teeth" and for "stealing Austria before a horrified and apparently impotent world."

I think from now on I'm just going to assume I'm being trolled.

[QUOTE=jcb;512979]I think from now on I'm just going to assume I'm being trolled.[/QUOTE]

Look at the bright side, you must not be a keeper, cause everytime he hooks you, he throws you back. :)

* Weapons used in Syria on CIVILIANS........were produced in IRAQ. Hard to find that on the web, I wonder why. Reuters reported it, but you will never find it.



Geo, I may be wrong but didnt Reagan give those weapons to Iraq to beat back Iran?

[QUOTE=parker;512983]* Weapons used in Syria on CIVILIANS........were produced in IRAQ. Hard to find that on the web, I wonder why. Reuters reported it, but you will never find it.



Geo, I may be wrong but didnt Reagan give those weapons to Iraq to beat back Iran?[/QUOTE]

I don't think so........

I've read quite a bit on the net about this, and came across this transcript. It talks quite a bit about the usage of chemical weapons, and even directly asks if the United States provided them....

[url=http://www.fas.org/irp/congress/2002_cr/s092002.html]Did the U.S. Help Saddam Acquire Biological Weapons[/url]


There was no real answer to that. I did find something from an Iranian "think tank" that stated that the US provided 21 different batches of Anthrax included in a shipment of 70 chemical agents......Nothing corroborated though.

Riddle me this though.........don't you find it convenient to blame Reagan for this 3 decades later......while Syria KILLS with chemicals that came from IRAQ, which according to APB didn't exist..........even though the ENTIRE world thought they did, and the United Nations voted on it......

HM.

Let's get this thread back on track. I sure hope that someone can ID these two and the FBI can get ahold of them to see if they are the culprits or not. The sooner we catch these SOB the better IMHO.

Short of killing all the potential terrorists how should we stop these terrorists acts.

If we catch the people that did this bombing and make an example of them some how do you think that will stop others from carrying out more terrorist bombing? I doubt that it will. We could crusify those responsble and let them die a slow death on the cross and that still would not deter others from doing more bombings in retailation. Nothing short of killing them all will stop the bombings from happening.

There is no way we would even think about crusifying anyone and there is no way we could or would think about killing them all. So what's left to do? We could put them to death which is what I think will happen. Lethal Injections given to those that did this still won't stop the others but it will get revenge for those that died from the bombings. But it won't bring anyone back to live or fix what has been broken.

Looking at the pictures of the guys that the FBI released today Thursday April 18th 2013 I can't really tell who or what they are. I mean their nationality. Can you tell their nationality from those pictures? Are they foreign or domestic terrorists?

[QUOTE=GeoFisher;512984]I don't think so........

I've read quite a bit on the net .[/QUOTE]



[url=http://www.ispot.tv/ad/7VOE/state-farm-the-internet-and-french-model]State Farm TV Commercial, 'The Internet and French Model' - iSpot.tv[/url]

Wow, extensive research.

[QUOTE=Moveon;512990]Let's get this thread back on track. I sure hope that someone can ID these two and the FBI can get ahold of them to see if they are the culprits or not. The sooner we catch these SOB the better IMHO.

Short of killing all the potential terrorists how should we stop these terrorists acts.

If we catch the people that did this bombing and make an example of them some how do you think that will stop others from carrying out more terrorist bombing? I doubt that it will. We could crusify those responsble and let them die a slow death on the cross and that still would not deter others from doing more bombings in retailation. Nothing short of killing them all will stop the bombings from happening.

There is no way we would even think about crusifying anyone and there is no way we could or would think about killing them all. So what's left to do? We could put them to death which is what I think will happen. Lethal Injections given to those that did this still won't stop the others but it will get revenge for those that died from the bombings. But it won't bring anyone back to live or fix what has been broken.

Looking at the pictures of the guys that the FBI released today Thursday April 18th 2013 I can't really tell who or what they are. I mean their nationality. Can you tell their nationality from those pictures? Are they foreign or domestic terrorists?[/QUOTE]

Personally I think that if they are caught and proven to be guilty they should be killed. I'm not a fan of pussy footing around with cowards. Give them some of their own medicine....we can't try and handle these people with kid gloves.

Looking forward I can't imagine the pressure this will put on the Ky Derby and other sporting events. I'm not that big of a fan of horse racing so I didn't have plans on going but if I was going I would rethink it.

[QUOTE=GeoFisher;512984]I don't think so........

I've read quite a bit on the net about this, and came across this transcript. It talks quite a bit about the usage of chemical weapons, and even directly asks if the United States provided them....

[URL="http://www.fas.org/irp/congress/2002_cr/s092002.html"]Did the U.S. Help Saddam Acquire Biological Weapons[/URL]


There was no real answer to that. I did find something from an Iranian "think tank" that stated that the US provided 21 different batches of Anthrax included in a shipment of 70 chemical agents......Nothing corroborated though.

Riddle me this though.........don't you find it convenient to blame Reagan for this 3 decades later......while Syria KILLS with chemicals that came from IRAQ, which according to APB didn't exist..........even though the ENTIRE world thought they did, and the United Nations voted on it......

HM.[/QUOTE]

Actually I dont blame Reagan because I really dont know as I stated but seems like something in my memory from the past thinks he supplied the chemical weapons that Iraq had to fight back Iran. I dont find it convenient, just asking because you like to hunt for this kind of information I would guess.