Understanding terrorism

[tw]

When caught lying, then a liar can either apologize for his mistake, OR he can ignore the accusation. Urbane Guerrilla, caught rewriting history for a self serving agenda, instead posts

Originally Posted by Urbane Guerrilla

TW, you are very much at pains to misread what I write, and the Case Closed article is one familiar to me. What you antis just refuse to wrap your minds around is that Saddam was hooked up with the terror guys -- but didn't himself do 9-11, and we who want to win this understand that.

The enemy of fundamentalist Islamics extremists (ie Al Qaeda) are secular governments. Since Urbane Guerrilla has been exposed lying about Vietnam, he now changes the topic to Saddam. He claims Saddam was hooked up with people who were Saddam's most dangerous enemies. Saddam of Iraq, Asad of Syria, Nasser and Sadat of Egypt, and Hussein of Jordan are all secular governments - targets of the same people that Urbane Guerrilla tells us that Saddam was, instead, allied with.

In "The World According to Urbane Guerrilla", enemies are allies? Same pulp fiction claimed that America could have easily won the Vietnam War. Same pulp fiction claims that the US only fought a "polite" war in Vietnam. Same pulp fiction invents myths as to why Ho Chi Minh asked to become a protectorate of the United States. Same pulp fiction that claimed the US was not forcing democracy on anyone (even though a 15 August US deadline is being imposed on the Iraqis). UG now pretends he did not invent those fictions.

This goes right to the personal character of Urbane Guerrilla. You advocate wasting of good American lives by justifying lies; inventing enemies; posting pulp fiction to cover up insufficient knowledge of history. Many good American died because a president also did same - for a self serving agenda. Why would Urbane Guerrilla disparage good American solidiers - of past and future? Your integrity and honesty is the question. UG doesn't even deny lying about history - especially when caught doing it repeatedly. Instead UG pretends those lies were never posted.

Saddam was not a threat. A well proven fact. Even George Jr no longer makes that claim that UG now posts. Still Urbane Guerrilla would promote a myth that has long since been proven wrong - "that Saddam was hooked up with the terror guys". This way UG need not admit to lying about Vietnam.

Well UG - prove it. Don't wait for the translation. I am prepared to wait for hell to freeze over. Your next post, if you are an honest man, will prove "that Saddam was hooked up with the terror guys". Show us that you are not just Rush Limbaugh high on hard drugs. Show us. Can I make the challenge any more obvious? Prove your accusation or admit to, again, posting more lies. You made the claim. Prove it. Show us "that Saddam was hooked up with the terror guys".

[Urbane Guerrilla]

TW, you are not seeing the whole forest because you are fascinated with about three of its trees. If Islamoterrorism is to go away, its sponsors must be finished off.

Islamoterrorism doesn't happen without the say-so of Islamic governments or government entities. It keeps transpiring, for a somewhat far-flung instance, that Indonesian Islamoterrorists have covert ties with the Indonesian military. And just how many Islamic nations/governments are on the list of terrorist sponsors? Two that were recently knocked off that list are Afghanistan and Iraq. Still on it are Syria and Iran among others.

Your next post, if you are an honest man, will prove "that Saddam was hooked up with the terror guys".

That was proven by the "Case Closed" article, which you were so kind as to link to and to exerpt from. Really, TW, your analysis of all this can most charitably be described as eccentric, and more clearly described as friggin' bonkers, and nobody thinks your silly personal accusations have any basis.

Same pulp fiction that claimed the US was not forcing democracy on anyone (even though a 15 August US deadline is being imposed on the Iraqis).

Let this stand for several other instances of a peculiar view of this. The Iraqis, having had the obstacle to democratization the Saddam régime constituted removed, are setting forth a constitution for a democracy, and unlike TW, they are not complaining about getting it done by mid-August. They figure, nothing loath, that a constitution might as well be drafted by a certain date and be ready for a plebiscite then. Imposed, quotha!

TW is driven by the insane belief that the United States must be the root of all evil, apparently because, well, it's the United States. So he goes hysterical whenever this anti-American orthodoxy is criticized, or, God or whatever forbid, challenged. As long as you use this for the basis of your thinking, TW, you can be nothing but wrong. And you still don't know any twentieth-century history. Telling me you do doesn't help you. I'm not crazy enough to believe it.

[tw]

Originally Posted by Urbane Guerrilla

TW, you are not seeing the whole forest because you are fascinated with about three of its trees. If Islamoterrorism is to go away, its sponsors must be finished off.

Islamoterrorism doesn't happen without the say-so of Islamic governments or government entities. It keeps transpiring, for a somewhat far-flung instance, that Indonesian Islamoterrorists have covert ties with the Indonesian military. And just how many Islamic nations/governments are on the list of terrorist sponsors? Two that were recently knocked off that list are Afghanistan and Iraq. Still on it are Syria and Iran among others.

Your terrorist nation list is promoted to people who need not first learn history. Indonesia as a terrorist nation is clearly absurd; only for those who blindly believe; reality be damned. Only an extreme right wing agenda - to even promote hate and justify more wars - would make that claim.

Meanwhile, those 'Islamoterrorists' are a greater threat to the local secular government including Syria, Indonesia, Egypt, Syria, the many K'stan nations, Pakistan, western China, and Saudi Arabia. UG, learn from history rather than blindly believe what a drug addicted Rush Limbaugh tells you to preach.

Who almost killed the Prime Minister of Egypt? Who then later and successfully killed Nasser? Who was so close to killing Syria's Asad that Asad literally massacred something like all of 10,000 people in towns that were 'hotbeds' of 'Islamoterrorists'. What government supported and encouraged these 'Islamoterrorists' attacks? IOW why do you post facts that are invented - fictional - created to promote a political agenda much like the Nazis did in 1930s Germany and Milosevik did in 1990 Balkans?

IOW this is about the character and integrity of Urbane Guerrilla:

Don't wait for the translation. I am prepared to wait for hell to freeze over. Your next post - as a liar must do - avoided "that Saddam was hooked up with the terror guys". Show us that you are not just Rush Limbaugh high on hard drugs. Casting blame on TW does not get UG out of this. Outright and intentional lying is the most unforgivable sin one can practice here. Prove "that Saddam was hooked up with the terror guys". An honest and credible Urbane Guerrilla could prove "that Saddam was hooked up with the terror guys". Prove it. Show us that you don't just rewrite history when it is convenient - that you have a shred of honesty inside you.

We are now stuck right here on the character and integrity of Urbane Guerrilla who refuses to: show us "that Saddam was hooked up with the terror guys". How cold is it in hell? I don't need a forest to recognize lying. Show us that Urbane Guerrilla has some integrity. Answer the question.

[tw]

Least you forget:

Originally Posted by tw

Outright and intentional lying is the most unforgivable sin one can practice here.

[mrnoodle]

Here ya go. From page 1 of a Google search of "saddam terror link"

Ugly web page, but the pictures are pretty damning. Don't want a debate -- I can't go toe-to-toe with every 3-page instance of random, disjointed, encyclopaedic facts about unrelated wars (I'm at work). So I will just leave the site out there as a visual aid.

[Hobbs]

British Plan to Deport 10 Foreigners


You gotta love those Brits. They don't screw around with niceities, PC, or profiling and they don't take from no one.

[Bullitt]

The man himself was a terrorist.. lest we forget the Kurdish gassing, etc.

[mrnoodle]

When you look at the antiwar rhetoric, the attempts to demonize a perfectly respectable SCOTUS candidate, and the general shrillness of the left for the last 5 years, something becomes more apparent every day. The only real platform the Democrats are running on these days is "sour grapes over the results of the last two elections".

If they put as much effort into finding real solutions as they did into trying to neutralize any and all Bush efforts, we might actually get somewhere.

[lookout123]

next time you see someone ranting because the poor blacks and mexicans are disproportionately fighting and dieing in the middle east - show them this.

for some reason i can't grab the actual chart, so you will have to follow the link. what i see is that of all the deaths in Iraq:

1,265 have been white
195 hispanic
185 black

not that you would hear that on the evening news.

[Troubleshooter]

Originally Posted by lookout123

next time you see someone ranting because the poor blacks and mexicans are disproportionately fighting and dieing in the middle east - show them this.

for some reason i can't grab the actual chart, so you will have to follow the link. what i see is that of all the deaths in Iraq:

1,265 have been white
195 hispanic
185 black

not that you would hear that on the evening news.

It's Flash so you'd have to do a screen grab.

[Hobbs]

Who the hell is ranting about blacks and hispanics disproportionately fighting in Iraq?!?!?!?!?!? My God! have we really run out of things to truely gripe about!!!??? What do these people think, that the war in Iraq is yet another underhanded way the "man" is beating the brother down?

[glatt]

As far as I know, lookout123 is the only one ranting about it. I haven't seen it anywhere else.

I've heard of people ranting about the disproportional number of blacks in Vietnam, but not Iraq. Maybe I'm sheltered. After all, I'm sure you can find someone somewhere to rant about any paricular issue.

[Urbane Guerrilla]

Indonesia as a terrorist nation is clearly absurd; only for those who blindly believe; reality be damned.

Read Allah's Torch, by Tracy Dahlby, you incompetent.

While the situation there looks defusable from the international relations viewpoint, I don't think we've heard the last of them.

After all, I'm sure you can find someone somewhere to rant about any particular issue.

As evidenced by the worthy TW. Good thing I'm not going to take him seriously. He shows me yet another example of what leftism does to the weak-minded -- further data.

"Least" you forget? -- don't ever try hiring on as a copyeditor.

[xoxoxoBruce]

Baer ruled that Saddam Hussein’s government was complicit in the September 11 attacks and that the Baathist government owed the plaintiffs a judgment of $104 million.

The way the American courts work they would have found the airlines complicit in the Sept.11th attacks if the Feds hadn't prevented it.

[lookout123]

i haven't heard many people ranting about minorities in combat recently. Al Sharptong was a few months ago, i've heard Dean do it once or twice but it didn't really catch. then i had a client come complaining because they were taking all the mexican soldiers and sending them to Iraq to die so no "white boys" would have to. that conversation motivated me to look up the actual numbers, coincidentally CNN ran the numbers during the same week. so there you go - more insight into the twisted thought process of lookout.