Thank you Americans

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Mystery Squid @ Nov 13 2006, 10:47 AM) [snapback]348182[/snapback]</div>

As opposed to, oh, Fox News?

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(InfideNino @ Nov 13 2006, 10:31 AM) [snapback]348173[/snapback]</div>

I have heard of the Geneva Conventions including all the Articles that refer to terrorism - what about our "enemy" and the Geneva conventions??

America is not standing up to anybody. Bow to terror - the USA - I am sure Saddam et al agree with you too.

Anyhow, Kumbaya to you too. Enjoy and they come for us.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Stev0 @ Nov 13 2006, 10:54 AM) [snapback]348187[/snapback]</div>

No no no. They're Fair and Balanced. They tell me they are, so it must be true.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Stev0 @ Nov 13 2006, 12:54 PM) [snapback]348187[/snapback]</div>

See Fox News how you like, if you believe they're unbalanced, fine. Truthfully, I've never sat down an actually watched Fox news, but that's beside the point anyway.

mm's f911 is such egregious propaganda, anyone, ANYONE, who buys any of it on face value is a fool.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Stev0 @ Nov 13 2006, 10:54 AM) [snapback]348187[/snapback]</div>

I think more like CNN or NY Times or WaPo.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Mystery Squid @ Nov, 11:05 AM) [snapback]348203[/snapback]</div>

Did you see F9/11? I agree that some of MM's talk-over was a bit much. I expected it going in, and tried as much as possible to ignore the MM voice and pay attention instead to the background story. The footage and interviews. Who is MM? A filmmaker. What he has to say is his opinion. But if you can ignore that part, and watch what is being presented, it makes a damning story to Bush and his motives. From the very mouth of Bush, among others.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Dragonfly @ Nov 13 2006, 02:46 PM) [snapback]348267[/snapback]</div>

I actually own the damn thing. I wanted to see just how much propaganda was in it. Turns out, the WHOLE thing is. There is no real damning story, at least, nothing most reasonable rational people didn't already know anyway.

mike moore is as objective as

 

<strike>mike moore</strike> mystery squid is as objective as

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Dragonfly @ Nov 13 2006, 01:59 PM) [snapback]348315[/snapback]</div>

I don't think the personal attack is necessary or represents you properly. Now that you want to stay here in the good old US of A remember we try to forgive and forget, look for the good in people, understand differences amongst each other, give the benefit of the doubt and such, understand why he said what he said, revel in the differences he represents, support the views of the minority - in fact being the minority you the majority should go out of its way to make sure his words and beliefs have at least equal weight to yours. Your comment is not very American of you.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(dbermanmd @ Nov, 02:23 PM) [snapback]348326[/snapback]</div>

You're making my point for me. F9/11 was a documentary overlaid with personal opinion from someone with no real authority. Any reasonable person should be able to ignore the opinion part of it and look at the facts that were presented, and the opinions that were presented from people with authority, which is what I was suggesting. Instead, MS rejected the movie outright, and compared MM to Hitler, rather than trying to understand MM's point, support the views of (what was at that time) the minority, and so on. The unwillingness to try to separate fact from opinion makes for close-mindedness. MS is demonstrating no more open-mindedness that MM.

 

Anyone care to name one false thing stated in Fahrenheit 9/11? Before you do, however, I already have a rebuttal.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Dragonfly @ Nov 13 2006, 04:34 PM) [snapback]348335[/snapback]</div>

lol, get thine head out of thine arse my friend...

"trying to understand MM's point" :lol:

...all too well actually.

believe me, had there been any good/rational/reasonable points, i most certainly, would have given him credit for it. hell, i BOUGHT the damn thing, sat through, and watched the whole thing, every dimension he presented was flat out, opinioned, propaganda BS. "rejected the movie outright", yeah, NO KIDDING. sorry, but dog shi t is still dog shi t no matter how you slice it...

think about it, you feel that I MUST somehow understand his point or I'm closed minded... Yeah, well felt the same way, if you somehow didn't understand his point, you were closed minded, and won a free ticket on a train ride to Auschwitz...

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Dragonfly @ Nov 13 2006, 02:34 PM) [snapback]348335[/snapback]</div>

A very American trait is ignoring things you should obviously ignore. Sometimes the most powerful rebuttal is silence.

 

*Cough* Godwin *Cough*

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(dbermanmd @ Nov 13 2006, 05:02 PM) [snapback]348199[/snapback]</div>

What's your point? How do you justify Guantanamo Bay and the detainment of prisoners without trial?
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(dbermanmd @ Nov 13 2006, 05:02 PM) [snapback]348199[/snapback]</div>

How was Saddam a terrorist? A dictator, sure, but terrorist?

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(InfideNino @ Nov 13 2006, 04:07 PM) [snapback]348405[/snapback]</div>

You are joking aren't you?

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(dbermanmd @ Nov 13 2006, 10:09 PM) [snapback]348407[/snapback]</div>

No. Please explain.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(InfideNino @ Nov 13 2006, 04:14 PM) [snapback]348410[/snapback]</div>

Saddam a terrorist? - your question -

Why don't you ask the relatives of the 100,000+ kurds he murdered with WMD's - as a starter, then
Why don't you ask the relatives of the hundreds of thousands of corpses that were pulled from his mass graves.

Then, if you want, ask the Kuwaiti's - you know, that little country he invaded and raped.

Then, if you want, go to the Marshland Arabs, get their take on him.

You may be the only person on this 6 Billion people planet that doesn't think Saddam is a mass murderer - cool.

And, you think Rumsfeld is worse and should be tried by some european kangaroo court that would not even go after someone like Saddam who has the blood of hundreds of thousands on his hands.

Dont forget that little war he waged with Iran...



<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(InfideNino @ Nov 13 2006, 04:07 PM) [snapback]348405[/snapback]</div>

Quick question, where in any of the Geneva Conventions does it protect non-uniformed combatants? And is not a military tribunal a trial - the same that were used in every other war we fought?

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(dbermanmd @ Nov 13 2006, 04:27 PM) [snapback]348416[/snapback]</div>

Would that would be the same war in which the United States sided with Iraq?
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Wikipedia @ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iran-Iraq_War#The_Tanker_War_and_U.S._entanglement)</div>

I seem to remember a photo of Donald Rumsfeld shaking hands with Saddam from this same time period, too.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(dbermanmd @ Nov 13 2006, 10:27 PM) [snapback]348416[/snapback]</div>

Of course Saddam is a mass murderer, I never denied that. What he did was absolutely horrible and inexcusable. I just looked up some definitions of the word 'terrorist' and I have to admit that by most definitions he would qualify. I thought terrorists were non-governmental and I still think that's what is usually implied, at least in Dutch. I would call invading a country war but I guess technically you could call almost any act of violence terrorism. However, we can all agree that Saddam was evil.

Do you think invading Iraq was a way of not bowing for terrorism? The 'terrorism' committed by Saddam was never directed at the United States, was it? Well, until they invaded Iraq of course. I guess defending yourself is also a form of terrorism. Do you not agree that the US have let terrorism affect their whole society?

Even the US Supreme Court have ruled that the Geneva Conventions apply to all detainees in the War on Terror, and the rest of the world agrees.

I never even mentioned Rumsfeld so please don't put words in my mouth. By 'some european kangaroo court', do you mean the International Court of Justice of the UN, a rather important organization the US is a member of? The reason I was responding in the first place was that I found it strange that you first stated that "The USA will NEVER EVER rely on the UN to tell us what battles we will or will not fight" and then in the same post blamed Europe for not standing up against Hitler for breaking treaties. To be clear: I think people should stand up against governments breaking treaties and so I think the Americans and the rest of the world should stand up against the Bush administration for doing so.

I usually don't post in the political threads (or in FHoP at all), but I thought I'd give it a try. I hope you'll answer my questions but you might have to wait until tomorrow for my answer, because I'm going to bed now.