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.

 

We ARE winning the war on terrorism!

page: 5
0
<< 2  3  4    6  7 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 8 2006 @ 04:22 PM
link   
That is what I want: for the survival of the people through cooperation, so long as they spread out all across the land, learn how to be self-subsistent and make themselves harder targets.

If anyone even forms a militia and locates it in one place, they are not wise. They can be entirely taken out with much less than a nuclear weapon.

[edit on 8-7-2006 by tmac100]




posted on Jul, 8 2006 @ 04:23 PM
link   

Originally posted by tmac100
WOW! Someone came to be accurate, but was silent when the simplest of questions were being asked and the simplest of common sense violated! Even to the point of being asked what in the Patriot Act is new when all of its provisions can be found in the Inquisitions!


In other words, you realize there's no merit to your claim about the quote.
As for common sense, it's best not to sensationalize things... For instance, where in the Inquisitions were electronic wiretapping and data collection occurring?



Still where is a comprehensive record of the words of Josemaria Escriva?


The two links I provided, specifically this one:

www.escrivaworks.org...



posted on Jul, 8 2006 @ 04:24 PM
link   
In other words, you are not just a debater, but will leave the plainest of questions unanswered? The plainest common sense violated? Even making a king out of someone who failed more than 3,000 lives? Even standing around to accuse true Americans of paranoia, and allow a false war to take place to the killing of thousands by a group of people who tells us this proves Michael Moore is an embarrassment?

For what purpose?

[edit on 8-7-2006 by tmac100]



posted on Jul, 8 2006 @ 04:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by tmac100
That is not true. In Bush's Inauguration, he spoke these words:

January 2001
"Sometime tonight we are called to do great things. But as a saint of our times has said, everyday we are called to do small things with great love."

Those were the words of Jose Maria Escriva


I just wanted to point out that they are not the words of Jose Maria Escriva, but Mother Teresa:


At his inauguration, President Bush took the oath of office with tears in his eyes, and his hand on the same Bible George Washington used. His inaugural speech incorporated frequent references to God, and they rang true. On our social obligations, he quoted Mother Teresa: "Sometimes in life we are called to do great things. But as a saint of our times has said, `every day we are called to do small things with great love'". Later that day, he welcomed a telegraphed blessing from Pope John Paul II.
Source.



posted on Jul, 8 2006 @ 04:29 PM
link   

Originally posted by tmac100
That is not true. In Bush's Inauguration, he spoke these words:

January 2001
"Sometime tonight we are called to do great things. But as a saint of our times has said, everyday we are called to do small things with great love."

Those were the words of Jose Maria Escriva



Originally posted by Implosion
I just wanted to point out that they are not the words of Jose Maria Escriva, but Mother Teresa:


That had to hurt in the credibility department...


Or is Mother Teresa part of the evil design now?

How much of your rhetoric is based on flawed information?



posted on Jul, 8 2006 @ 04:30 PM
link   
Just like we saw President Bush has no conscience, you come along. With all the questions I have asked what kind of human(??) can see when credibility is lacking?

I will have you to remember I will not reward a president for failing to do his job. If an internal tragedy takes place, let alone the worst internal one, I will not stage an independent investigation of it at least a year afterward. Though these words will fly by you, I am for credibility!

I will have to check out my source for that quote. It came from a scholar. Josemaria Escriva himself may well have been quoting Mother Theresa, or the other way around. But I'm different. You will still see the questions waiting to be answered, and you will dance around them in perfect peace, until you see some form of an error. Then you will move. Whatever error I might have made, it sure does not amount to the consequences around the errors I pointed out. No lives have been lost. You must pass by the barn of Bush to seek "credibility."

STILL, the Patriot Act is nothing new. Compare it to the Inquisitions and how they ran if accuracy is important to you. Tell us what you find around the fallacy that a NEW DAY has arisen that demands we make NEW and original laws to combat terror.

The great detectors of lacking credibility!

[edit on 8-7-2006 by tmac100]



posted on Jul, 8 2006 @ 04:42 PM
link   

Originally posted by tmac100
... I am for credibility!

I will have to check out my source for that quote. It came from a scholar.


Would "Anileve' be your scholar?



Feb 12 2004, 01:21 AM
Inauguration speech of George Bush:

January 2001
"Sometime tonight we are called to do great things. But as a saint of
our times has said, everyday we are called to do small things with
great love." The words were from Josemaria Escriva, the founder of
Opus Dei.

Fifteen years ago, at the height of the Reagan administration, dozens of Opus Dei members held prominent jobs in the White House, on Capitol Hill, and throughout the government.

hyeforum.com...


Hmmm... Word for word for what you "wrote" or actually plagiarized. Funny thing about the internet, it doesn't take long to discover "fact" and other interesting anomalies.

I would suggest you review the following:

Mod Note: Terms & Conditions Of Use – Please Review This Link.

Mod Note: No Quote/Plagiarism – Please Review This Link.

Mod Note: New External Source Tags – Please Review This Link.



posted on Jul, 8 2006 @ 04:45 PM
link   
What a world this would be if the American people lose all their liberties, their property and many of them their lives.

And...

Well, ...

no one plagiarizes, but everyone has "credibility."

It would be a very horrible thought!

Stand up and make sure no one brings on this future!

Yes or no, is the Patriot Act very different from the Inquisitions? Describe these two paradigms for us.

[edit on 8-7-2006 by tmac100]



posted on Jul, 8 2006 @ 06:10 PM
link   
Mirthful Me


I recall these immortal words:

"It can´t be reasoned with, cannot be bargained with, and will not ever stop until you are dead" Kyle Reese explaining to Sarah Connor what the Terminator is

I´m not ignoring anyone, but am severely tempted at times. But then I ask myself "what if they start to post something interesting for a change?". Suspense would kill me. Impossible Catch-22 situation. So no ignore list.


With that, back on topic:

We are NOT winning the war on terror people, there is no war on terror, only a war on freedom and common sense. (Yeees I´ve said that a 1000 times before)

Maybe our grandchildren will look back upon this period and find some humor in the way we´ve let it all happen. For now, this whole new Pax Americana is an insult to anyone with a 100+ IQ, regardless where they live.



posted on Jul, 8 2006 @ 06:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by undecided2
I realize many of you are doubters out there, but I honestly believe we are winning. The latest victory can be seen in the thwarted NYC tunnel bombing plot.

abcnews.go.com...

There have been several plots discovered and stopped since 9/11. I think the Bush administration deserves some credit here. I know many of you will say this is how they planned it (9/11 conspiracy, Iraq war, etc.), but there will always be those who think everything that happens is due to some shady conspiracy.


You can't be serious. Who is the "we" that is winning this war on terror? The folk responsible for 911? Or for 77? This is the equivalent of a German in the 30s and 40s equating himself with the Nazis. There is no we in this context.



posted on Jul, 8 2006 @ 06:19 PM
link   
This is what has been happening for years. The questions are again ignored and then followed with accusations to make sure they are not answered.

The call to answer the simple questions I gave is not for pride's sake. So long as the questions are not answered, blood is more shed and lives are more taken. We can see that the responding posters have no conscience.

There are questions waiting for you to answer. Reason with me why demanding for answers to the simplest of questions proves that I cannot be reasoned with.

I challenge you to show us why I have to allow questions to go unanswered to be reasonable in your Inquisition world. Which book of ethics tells us that simple questions must not be answered. I challenge you. Which book of ethics tells us that forums will be sucessful if all questions must not be answered. It's not all questions? Or maybe then it is the most important questions.

What is it that made you, with all my constant appeals and common sense, come back and accuse me of being unreasonable because the world MUST NOT HAVE QUESTIONS THAT SAVES LIVES ANSWERED!

May I challenge your credibility by stating that endless, determined and mindless accusations of lacking credibility against those who disagree with you will neither answer the simple questions nor allow discussion.

Why then would guys like you insist, persist and defacate to persist in making sure no one knows there is a conspiracy? Why do you insist on acting suspicious, and then, forgeting constantly that this is a free country, demand the American people not know there is a global conspiracy when it is obvious that there is?

[edit on 8-7-2006 by tmac100]



posted on Jul, 8 2006 @ 08:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by tmac100
That is what I want: for the survival of the people through cooperation, so long as they spread out all across the land, learn how to be self-subsistent and make themselves harder targets.


Then you have not read about the tactic of emptying the hinterlands with selective bioweapons?

If anyone even forms a militia and locates it in one place, they are not wise. They can be entirely taken out with much less than a nuclear weapon. [edit on 8-7-2006 by tmac100]

A militia's armory is not effective against gps-located electronic laser hits, bioweapons and radiation. Nothing you can store in your basement is a match for the arsenal that is pointing at us now. They can follow a person's movements crossing a street, and they can watch you take a shower in your home at night, the walls of your home transparent as glass--with heat-seeking photography.

This is an inter-dimensional war. The only defense is psychical -- dimming down the light of your your aura by allowing yourself to experience doubt and shame; insulating your body with nonconductive materials while you sleep; and calling on God and angels to help you manifest what you need for each day's journey. We may have to be on the move. It will only be by miracles that we will make it through this.

So? Invoke miracles. It's possible, for those who truly want to live on with freeness of speech and a return to cooperative ethics. Anything is possible.



posted on Jul, 9 2006 @ 12:59 AM
link   


From page 3
Whatever may challenge your intelligence will be shown to be your own fault or inadequacies, all the more showing that Bush apologists are never to be trusted. There are questions for you to answer. What I'm saying now is so simple, it will be your own fault if you can't understand what I'm asking.

Page 4
If he was concerned about FACTS he would answer the simplest of questions. What he and others have to then do is to babble till damnation day . . . .


Page 5
In other words, you are not just a debater, but will leave the plainest of questions unanswered? The plainest common sense violated? Even making a king out of someone who failed more than 3,000 lives? Even standing around to accuse true Americans of paranoia . . .

. . . just like we saw President Bush has no conscience, you come along. With all the questions I have asked what kind of human(??) can see when credibility is lacking?


. . . We can see that the responding posters have no conscience.


So how is this not trolling?

Everything that is not forbidden, is allowed; therefore, this sort of thing is acceptable under the current rules, right?

Even if someone from on the opposite side of the "question" posts with the same kind of rhetoric?



posted on Jul, 9 2006 @ 01:27 AM
link   
War on terrorism does't exist for truth, it's a forged word expression coined by the oil capital monoply .They always have new words to explain for the bad they do. If you remember the word "oil crisis" from 70s last century? It is proved to be What? What you know I don't have to say.



posted on Jul, 9 2006 @ 01:59 AM
link   
"I realize many of you are doubters out there, but I honestly believe we are winning. The latest victory can be seen in the thwarted NYC tunnel bombing plot."

The war on terror is an odd war since it is unwinnable. The united states media can be considered terror organizations. Terrorism does not neccisarily mean to commit acts of violence to spread a message. Everytime the media reports that terrorists are getting ready to strike or that some have been busted they cause people to go into paranoia mode they keep the 'terror' alive.

Terrorism is an over rated term that has become associated with violent acts. This in turn keeps people fearful of the muslim populations.

Since terror or terrorism is not a defined enemy it is an un-winnable war. The war on terror by definition should not exist. This is a war of values and beleifs and profits nothing more. Do you honestly think Iraq was a threat to US interests or do you think it was a ploy to divert your attention away from real threats? Violent terrorist acts are the least of your worries.



posted on Jul, 9 2006 @ 02:27 AM
link   

Originally posted by dr_strangecraft
I just had to revisit this comment. Ya know, it's funny how whaa and a couple of others took swipes at me for posting "facts" and "showing off" my education. And yet a bunch of people post the most inane drivel, and have absolutely no concept of America's historical interactions with muslim states, and then hurl venom at me for trying to educate the lot of you.


I appreciate your reply to my question, but, I don't appreciate you using my question as an example of how you are supposed to be our teacher or whatever you have in your mind that you are supposed to be here. We can see that you are knowledgeable about some of the things you write about. And, I hope I do not offend you but, if you are wondering why people may seem hostile to you, it's probably because sometimes you take on a pompous, egotistical, and arrogant attitude.


[edit on 9-7-2006 by Jamuhn]



posted on Jul, 9 2006 @ 07:47 AM
link   

Originally posted by Jamuhn

I appreciate your reply to my question, but, I don't appreciate you using my question as an example of how you are supposed to be our teacher or whatever you have in your mind that you are supposed to be here. We can see that you are knowledgeable about some of the things you write about. And, I hope I do not offend you but, if you are wondering why people may seem hostile to you, it's probably because sometimes you take on a pompous, egotistical, and arrogant attitude.


[edit on 9-7-2006 by Jamuhn]


You know, you're absolutely right about that. It's indefensible.

Musing about the source of it, I think it must be a reaction to my own sense of being outnumbered, even picked on, by odds of what seem like more than 10 to 1. Anger is almost always a reactive emotion.



For my part, I have tried to point out the how there are historical precedents to what is happening in the world, both in terms of american adventurism in muslim states, as well as logical attempts to nullify terrorist/guerilla warfare tactics.

That insight is generally unwelcome, both in this thread and others. As in this thread, using historical analogies or particular knowledge is often seen as "academic BS."

Just like on this thread, calling "academic BS" is seen as a valid way to refute another poster, without bothering to actually engage the poster's comments. For my part, I should have been able to respond to that tactic without playing into it.

"educate" was certainly a pompous and patronizing choice of words on my part. Eveyone else is is at least as considered in their opinions as I am in my own.

I'm the one who appears to be in need of some remedial work; and it ought to be in the school of rhetorical etiquette.

.

apologies to you specifically, and the other thread posters in general.



[edit on 9-7-2006 by dr_strangecraft]

[edit on 9-7-2006 by dr_strangecraft]



posted on Jul, 9 2006 @ 09:03 AM
link   
I too would like to apologize for calling Dr. Strangecrafts' hard work and scholarship "Academic BS". In retrospect, I know how I would feel if my pursuits were labeled in such a rude fashion.

Sorry, Dr!



posted on Jul, 9 2006 @ 11:47 AM
link   

Originally posted by The_Doctor
"I realize many of you are doubters out there, but I honestly believe we are winning. The latest victory can be seen in the thwarted NYC tunnel bombing plot."


I believe, sir, that you are very gullible. They're going to keep coming up with "thwarted bombing plots" just making them up, one after another, to keep us quiet and intimidated.

They are liars, sir, wholesale unmitigated unrelenting liars. And that's that. Not one word out of their mouths is worth taking at face value. And anyone who believes their stuff is a dreamer.



posted on Jul, 9 2006 @ 03:33 PM
link   
OUr grandchildren will look back on the manner in which we let the Bush family and their freinds rape America, and wonder why nobody stood and asked why.

The war on terror is a marketing tool, intended to instill fear and surrender of liberties and rights..... Which is occuring, america has become a land of Sheep and fools, running scared and handing over their heritage and Constitution to the highest bidder. Its sickening to watch.




top topics



 
0
<< 2  3  4    6  7 >>

log in

join