What is Bushs defenition of a Terrorist?
Kramers Intern
03-12-2004, 21:35
Its confusing, he accuses Iraq of having "turrishtsh" yet the only people Ive seen are people who are; helping us, fighting us which does NOT make them a "turrisht" they are only defending their country, like the confederates in the civil war, were they "turrishtsh" too? If China invaded the US to "liberate" us from Bush and I picked up a gun to shoot them would I be a "turrisht"? the other people are those who stay out of it. The biggest "turrisht" organization in the US is the Bush administration.
Gnostikos
03-12-2004, 21:45
A terrorist may be defined by at least one of these two qualities:
1) A Muslim
2) Someone who disagrees with Bush
Arribastan
03-12-2004, 21:47
Muslims, too?
huh.
I was under the impression that a lot of them just disagreed with him.
Sladgrad
03-12-2004, 21:50
Anything that doesn't help the US, the Canadians for instance, would be considered terrorists for not having any mad cows.
Gnostikos
03-12-2004, 21:52
Muslims, too?
huh.
I was under the impression that a lot of them just disagreed with him.
Nope. If you're Muslim, you're automatically a violent and hateful terrorist.
Under Bush? Anyone not radical fundamentalist Christian I think! :rolleyes:
Ashmoria
03-12-2004, 21:59
while these intellectual distinctions may be more than the president can deal with, a terrorist in iraq is one who is killing innocent, non military iraqi civilians as they wait on the street. or those who blow up mosques. i find those guys particularily disturbing.
Gnostikos
03-12-2004, 22:01
while these intellectual distinctions may be more than the president can deal with, a terrorist in iraq is one who is killing innocent, non military iraqi civilians as they wait on the street. or those who blow up mosques. i find those guys particularily disturbing.
And the people who are just getting married. We need to bomb them too.
Soviet Narco State
03-12-2004, 22:04
I think the massive over use of the word terrorist has a deeper meaning. Conservatives for all their tough talk are constantly terrified. They are terrified by minority employerment, women's rights, changing gender roles, multiculturalism, , new ideas, new value systems, different religions etc. Their whole approach to life is if something makes you feel slightly uncomfortable or scares you, shoot it, nuke it or pass a law so that you never have to see it and you can pretend it doesn't exist. Inside the heart of a staunch cultural conservative is a terrified little child.
Nope. If you're Muslim, you're automatically a violent and hateful terrorist.
Now that's a gross generalization. You also have to be Arab.
My Gun Not Yours
03-12-2004, 22:07
If you shoot non-combatants (people who never had a hostile thought in their life, and have no weapons, and never had any intention of fighting), you're a terrorist.
If you cut up bodies and burn the pieces while dancing in the street and hang the pieces from a bridge, you're a terrorist.
If you fly an airliner full of people who never had anything against you into a skyscraper, you're a terrorist.
If you capture old women who have spent their whole lives helping your children grow healthy and happy, and torture them, and blow their brains out on video, you're a terrorist.
If you broadcast that video in the hopes of making America look bad, you're a terrorist.
If you shoot from a mosque or hospital, and claim it's a war crime that someone shoots back at you, you're a terrorist.
If you use women and children as shields in combat, you're a terrorist.
If you talk young boys into wearing suicide bombs and using them, you're a terrorist.
Kramers Intern
03-12-2004, 22:11
while these intellectual distinctions may be more than the president can deal with, a terrorist in iraq is one who is killing innocent, non military iraqi civilians as they wait on the street. or those who blow up mosques. i find those guys particularily disturbing.
FYI they came after we invaded.
HEY!
I think we all understand the George W. Bush is a gift from God sent down to the earth to make everyone a happy, thoughtful, gun-love'n christian.
GOD BLESS JESUSLAND! :) :sniper: :)
Neo-Tommunism
03-12-2004, 22:21
I thought they had a color-coded system to determine who is a terrorist and who isn't? Elevated Terror Level: Brown?
Unterwarez
03-12-2004, 22:21
Terrorist-a radical who employs terror as a political weapon; usually organizes with other terrorists in small cells.
This makes the IRA of Ireland and the EPA Basques of Spain terrorists. There were terrorists on both sides of the American War of Independence and on both sides of the American Civil War. The only way to stop terrorism is to have the moral courage to actually fight a war! Not a police action, not a 'hearts and minds' campaign., but an honest to god full scale no holds barred war.
This American government and population doesn't have the moral courage to withstand the global scrutiny of a full scale war. You see in a war grandmothers get killed, little girls with dolls on their way to school get killed and kittens named Mitten get killed. Eventual the resolve of the populace to continue the conflict is broken and the terror/war can stop then.
My problem with the sitting government is that they started this and don't have the stomache to end it. There is a Persian saying that holds for us the United States in Iraq; "One idiot can push a rock into a well that one thousand wise men can't extricate."
Hopefully I don't have to draw a picture.
If you fly an airliner full of people who never had anything against you into a skyscraper, you're a terrorist.
Do you know why 9/11 happened? And, I'm not heading towards Bush knew about it or any of that other crap(even though he probably did.)
Halloccia
03-12-2004, 22:28
Its confusing, he accuses Iraq of having "turrishtsh" yet the only people Ive seen are people who are; helping us, fighting us which does NOT make them a "turrisht" they are only defending their country, like the confederates in the civil war, were they "turrishtsh" too? If China invaded the US to "liberate" us from Bush and I picked up a gun to shoot them would I be a "turrisht"? the other people are those who stay out of it. The biggest "turrisht" organization in the US is the Bush administration.
Those "insurgents" are mostly outside influences from Iran, Syria, etc. It's good that you notice that most Iraqis want these terrorists out of their country so they can go about their lives. Don't even compare those people to the Confederates. The Confederates were encouraged by France, England, et al because they could do business with the South, but the South was also trying to defend their way of life. (No, it was not COMPLETELY about slavery.) Pick up a history book and a few Confederate journals.
By the way, if China did invade the US, you would be branded a terrorist on their news agency since the Chinese control their media. Keep calling Bush a terrorist, we'll keep winning elections as long as your side looks that kookified.
Halloccia
03-12-2004, 22:35
If you shoot non-combatants (people who never had a hostile thought in their life, and have no weapons, and never had any intention of fighting), you're a terrorist.
If you cut up bodies and burn the pieces while dancing in the street and hang the pieces from a bridge, you're a terrorist.
If you fly an airliner full of people who never had anything against you into a skyscraper, you're a terrorist.
If you capture old women who have spent their whole lives helping your children grow healthy and happy, and torture them, and blow their brains out on video, you're a terrorist.
If you broadcast that video in the hopes of making America look bad, you're a terrorist.
If you shoot from a mosque or hospital, and claim it's a war crime that someone shoots back at you, you're a terrorist.
If you use women and children as shields in combat, you're a terrorist.
If you talk young boys into wearing suicide bombs and using them, you're a terrorist.
I doubt you're black and white approach to this will persuade the willfully ignorant, like Michael Moore followers. Glad you spelled it out for everyone, since they should know it by now...
Do you know why 9/11 happened? And, I'm not heading towards Bush knew about it or any of that other crap(even though he probably did.)
Oh, there's one now! Seriously think Bush knew and allowed 9/11? Keep bringing that up every election cycle so the Republicans can pick up 4 more seats in the Senate.
Oeryonder
03-12-2004, 22:36
HEY!
I think we all understand the George W. Bush is a gift from God sent down to the earth to make everyone a happy, thoughtful, gun-love'n christian.
GOD BLESS JESUSLAND! :) :sniper: :)
Absolutely! According to the newspapers, 80% of those who voted for him did so because of his morality. Just think of all the people he's bringing closer to God . . . one way or another.
Gnostikos
03-12-2004, 22:39
HEY!
I think we all understand the George W. Bush is a gift from God sent down to the earth to make everyone a happy, thoughtful, gun-love'n christian.
GOD BLESS JESUSLAND! :) :sniper: :)
Heil Jesus!!! Heil Bush!!! Mein Führers!!!
P.S. I have no idea what the German plural of führer is. Can anyone enlighten me?
Halloccia
03-12-2004, 22:43
I think the massive over use of the word terrorist has a deeper meaning.
No, we mean exactly that when we say most of the "insurgents" are terrorists or encouraged by terrorists.
Conservatives for all their tough talk are constantly terrified. They are terrified by minority employerment, women's rights, changing gender roles, multiculturalism, , new ideas, new value systems, different religions etc.
Actually, conservatives just get frustrated and pissed when you try imposing sexual/racial quotas on business and colleges (what affirmative action has turned into). Are there kooks on the right just like the left? I think we've proved that dozens of times on these forums.
Their whole approach to life is if something makes you feel slightly uncomfortable or scares you, shoot it, nuke it or pass a law so that you never have to see it and you can pretend it doesn't exist. Inside the heart of a staunch cultural conservative is a terrified little child.
I think you've got it the wrong way. Conservtives are fine with most things, it just when morons try to take the Declaration of Inependence out of school because it mentions 'our Creator' or try to force gay marriage into law that we get upset. The biggest problem with liberals is that they try to impose their view on Americans through activist judges instead of at the ballot box. That is why you get all the backlash from people (i.e gay marriage being banned in 11 states). Truth be known, liberals are their worst enemy. If you'd just be patient and let people accept your ideas instead of forcing it, we're be much better off. Liberals are the ones who seem to be deathly afraid of Bible-thumpers, not conservatives afraid of homosexuals.
Dempublicents
03-12-2004, 22:53
If you shoot non-combatants (people who never had a hostile thought in their life, and have no weapons, and never had any intention of fighting), you're a terrorist.
If you cut up bodies and burn the pieces while dancing in the street and hang the pieces from a bridge, you're a terrorist.
If you fly an airliner full of people who never had anything against you into a skyscraper, you're a terrorist.
If you capture old women who have spent their whole lives helping your children grow healthy and happy, and torture them, and blow their brains out on video, you're a terrorist.
If you broadcast that video in the hopes of making America look bad, you're a terrorist.
If you shoot from a mosque or hospital, and claim it's a war crime that someone shoots back at you, you're a terrorist.
If you use women and children as shields in combat, you're a terrorist.
If you talk young boys into wearing suicide bombs and using them, you're a terrorist.
Very nice.
But we were discussing Bush's definition of terrorist, not the real one.
For Bush, we would have to add:
If you admit any sympathy for the cause (although not the methods) of the terrorists, you are a terrorist.
If you don't like any of Bush's policies and express that view, you are a terrorist.
If you are not heterosexual and wish to have equal protection under the law, you are a terrorist.
If you are a teacher who protests the idiotic "Test and Spend" act, you are a terrorist.
Dempublicents
03-12-2004, 22:57
Actually, conservatives just get frustrated and pissed when you try imposing sexual/racial quotas on business and colleges (what affirmative action has turned into).
Actually, that's what affirmative action *used to be*. Luckily, those damn "activist judges" don't allow it.
Conservtives are fine with most things, it just when morons try to take the Declaration of Inependence out of school because it mentions 'our Creator'
I have never seen anyone try to do this.
or try to force gay marriage into law that we get upset.
Yes, because upholding the Equal Protection clause is such a bad thing.
The biggest problem with liberals is that they try to impose their view on Americans through activist judges instead of at the ballot box.
Common misconception. People with more liberal views are generally attempting to protect a minority from the majority. Judicial review is there, for the most part, *for this purpose*. Using the court system to have a law declared unconstitutional is just as proper as having voters vote for laws. It is *part of the system*.
Truth be known, liberals are their worst enemy. If you'd just be patient and let people accept your ideas instead of forcing it, we're be much better off.
Yeah, like those liberals who sat around and waited for the British to just come around to their point of view. Oh, wait....
The answer is ewasy enough to find - it is actually written quite clearly on a government website. If I though anyone here had the capacity to act like a grown up I'd share it with you. Sadly, with few exception, this thread reads like the ranting of some emotionally disturbed gradeschool child.
Andaluciae
03-12-2004, 23:18
Its confusing, he accuses Iraq of having "turrishtsh" yet the only people Ive seen are people who are; helping us, fighting us which does NOT make them a "turrisht" they are only defending their country, like the confederates in the civil war, were they "turrishtsh" too? If China invaded the US to "liberate" us from Bush and I picked up a gun to shoot them would I be a "turrisht"? the other people are those who stay out of it. The biggest "turrisht" organization in the US is the Bush administration.
Ok, first, the backbone of the insurgency are actually foreign fighters, now when I say backbone I don't mean the majority of the insurgents, I mean the people who make the insurgency what it is. The foreign fighters fire the locals up into a fervor that dies down quickly.
Many of the foreign fighters also tend to be involved in the suicide attacks against Iraqi civilians. These suicide attacks against civilians are designed to inspire fear in the people of Iraq. And those guys definitely are terrorists.
A better term for the locals who take up arms just to fight US troops would be Insurgents, or rebels. They can retain this term until they attack a civilian population group with the desire to cause fear in the civilians.
If China were to invade the US and conquer the US the term insurgents or rebels would fit Americans fighting the Chinese forces. Whilst, if they were to attack civilian populations with the goal of inspiring fear then they'd be terrorists.
George W. Bush is not a terrorist. Nor is the US. Both parties carry out attacks against military or insurgent targets. Attacks are not directed at civilians, and their intent is to not inspire fear. Civilians die accidentally, and that is not part of the definition of terrorism.
Let's stop being morons and using extreme left-slogans as our argument. Nor does mocking someone's colloquial vocabulary.
Ashmoria
03-12-2004, 23:34
And the people who are just getting married. We need to bomb them too.
well YEAH
how can you tell the difference between a terrorist and a groom anyway? its not like they are getting married in a good christian church!
i think SOME of those insurgents/terrorists are bathists who are trying to get power back. some are freedom fighters who dont agree with having an occupier in their country. some are assholes from way back who just like to kill stuff.
the rest are "outside agitators" getting in on the anti-american action.
havent the big boys in the administration admitted that they are using iraq as a magnet for terrorists so we can fight them in iraq rather than HERE? thats fine for us but it sure sucks for the iraqis.
Silent Truth
04-12-2004, 00:06
Apparantly it now also means "mothers in their homes." Recently my mom was dragged out of her house by police officers who had "reports that a shotgun was seen being fired in the neighborhood." Although that "shotgun" was actually a van backfiring in the street, the cops cited all their actions (including the search of her house without a warrent) under the patriot act. There was no gun, and the cops left without apollogy.
Thank you George Bush for protcting me from my moms raison oatmeal cookies.
GO RUSS FIENGOLD THE ONLY SENATOR TO OPPOSE THE PATRIOT ACT!!!
And I helped get him elected =)
Soviet Narco State
04-12-2004, 00:31
No, we mean exactly that when we say most of the "insurgents" are terrorists or encouraged by terrorists.
Actually, conservatives just get frustrated and pissed when you try imposing sexual/racial quotas on business and colleges (what affirmative action has turned into). Are there kooks on the right just like the left? I think we've proved that dozens of times on these forums.
I think you've got it the wrong way. Conservtives are fine with most things, it just when morons try to take the Declaration of Inependence out of school because it mentions 'our Creator' or try to force gay marriage into law that we get upset. The biggest problem with liberals is that they try to impose their view on Americans through activist judges instead of at the ballot box. That is why you get all the backlash from people (i.e gay marriage being banned in 11 states). Truth be known, liberals are their worst enemy. If you'd just be patient and let people accept your ideas instead of forcing it, we're be much better off. Liberals are the ones who seem to be deathly afraid of Bible-thumpers, not conservatives afraid of homosexuals.
We aren't afraid of bible thumpers we laugh at them. How can you blame judicial decisions on liberals? Conservatives challenge all kinds of laws in courts as well. For example in 1995 in the case US v. Lopez the court struck down the gun free schools act. Why didn't the gun nuts just try to change peoples minds about allowing guns in or near schools instead of getting activist anti federalist judges to do their dirty work ?
These gay marriage referendums were sponsored by Conservatives wanting to ban gay marriage, not by gays who wanted to get married. Here is a funny psychological survey showing that conservatives ARE truly afraid. http://mentalhealth.about.com/cs/academicpsychology/a/conservative.htm
apparently the IRA doesnt count
Andaluciae
04-12-2004, 01:15
Do you know why 9/11 happened? And, I'm not heading towards Bush knew about it or any of that other crap(even though he probably did.)
Well, the founding reason of the current AQ is that the US put forces in Saudi Arabia during the Gulf War.
Kramers Intern
04-12-2004, 01:21
Those "insurgents" are mostly outside influences from Iran, Syria, etc. It's good that you notice that most Iraqis want these terrorists out of their country so they can go about their lives. Don't even compare those people to the Confederates. The Confederates were encouraged by France, England, et al because they could do business with the South, but the South was also trying to defend their way of life. (No, it was not COMPLETELY about slavery.) Pick up a history book and a few Confederate journals.
By the way, if China did invade the US, you would be branded a terrorist on their news agency since the Chinese control their media. Keep calling Bush a terrorist, we'll keep winning elections as long as your side looks that kookified.
You have no idea what I wrote, maybe you should re-read the first post and tell me where I wrote that it was all about slavery, I mean you're dumb, I was saying Iraq was the wrong war, and same with the Civil War, if the south ceceded we wouldnt have to worry about Bush winning.