It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by Phugedaboudet
It didn't spark it..and me throwing gasoline onto a campfire that I didn't start, means I'm absolved of arson?
Originally posted by Jamuhn
Originally posted by Phugedaboudet
It didn't spark it..and me throwing gasoline onto a campfire that I didn't start, means I'm absolved of arson?
Why are you quoting my post at the bottom of yours?
Usually I'm keen enough to understand where a person stands in relations to myself, but if your post was meant to address my statement(s), you are sorely mistaken.
Such dense rhetoric compels one to believe that you may not intend to have a serious discussion.
Anyway, I'll rant for a second.
As has been shown above, the protests would have happened despite Newsweek. If it wasn't a Newsweek article, it would be torture in Afghanistan, if it wasn't torture in afghanistan, it would be US presence in Iraq.
You may also be mistaken in your assessment that the Moors had a major impact on the extremist state of Islam today. The current extremist idealogy among the Muslims is of a fairly recent occurence with such Muslim scholars as Wahhabi. As well, much of this extremist idealogy contains overtunes from Western philosophy. But while the Muslims secretly embrace these newER ideas, they are openly revolting against Western practices and customs.
I'm not sure why you are considering that this hostility from the Middle East started with our current president. Perhaps it would do you good to research on the history of US-Middle East relations.
[edit on 23-5-2005 by Jamuhn] [/quo
te]
Originally posted by spacedoubt
Name should be changed to NewsWEAK.
What would the idiot publishers have said if something would have happened to Mrs. Bush?
My guess is nothing, AND they would have spent the next week, coming up with more semi-believable tripe, to support the previous weeks tripe..
Originally posted by Rasputin13
I don't get it. The Bush Administration gets blaimed for not using diplomacy. Then when they send the First Lady to the Middle East in an act of diplomacy, they get blaimed for doing so! You can't have it both ways. How anyone can criticize the First Lady for visiting countries overseas, not to mention Palestinian womens' groups, is beyond me.
When it comes to the liberals and the anti-war activists, Bush is damned if he does and damned if he doesn't. It just shows the logic that us Republicans are up against!
Originally posted by subz
Remember the latest Palestinian intifada? That was sparked by Ariel Sharon visiting the Temple Mount.
Originally posted by Rasputin13
When it comes to the liberals and the anti-war activists, Bush is damned if he does and damned if he doesn't. It just shows the logic that us Republicans are up against!
Originally posted by Rasputin13
I don't get it. The Bush Administration gets blaimed for not using diplomacy. Then when they send the First Lady to the Middle East in an act of diplomacy, they get blaimed for doing so! You can't have it both ways. How anyone can criticize the First Lady for visiting countries overseas, not to mention Palestinian womens' groups, is beyond me.
When it comes to the liberals and the anti-war activists, Bush is damned if he does and damned if he doesn't. It just shows the logic that us Republicans are up against!