America's #1 Online Cigar Auction
first, best, biggest!

Last post 21 years ago by tailgater. 17 replies replies.
Story on counter-protesters
Jump to Bottom | Previous Topic | Next Topic
jdrabinski Offline
#1 Posted: Tue, Feb 18 2003, 2:51 PM EST
Joined: 08-16-2002
Posts: 794
Thought y'all would like this story on the counter-protest movement in support of the president:

http://www.bettybowers.com/protests.html

Enjoy!

John
tailgater Offline
#2 Posted: Tue, Feb 18 2003, 4:57 PM EST
Joined: 06-01-2000
Posts: 26,185
Proof that parody is not always funny.
Most of the drivel is no funnier than your typical political cartoons. But the comments that poke fun at the widow Lisa Beamer and the "Let's Roll" sign shows your true colors.
To post this is totally classless.
Todd Beamer and the plane full of Heros deserve better than your foul self serving bitterness.
jdrabinski Offline
#3 Posted: Tue, Feb 18 2003, 5:13 PM EST
Joined: 08-16-2002
Posts: 794
tailgater,

Whatever.

If THIS gets you so mad, you have some seriously thin skin. Or you can't stand the fact that millions are appalled at the Bush administration's actions. Where IS the counter-protest, anyway? Good question.

I LOVED hearing Bush try to explain his way out of these massive protests ... unprecedented protests, by the way. I can't believe republicans aren't horrified that he is representing their party. I mean, I can't stand republican politics, but y'all DO have some inteligent people out there.

If you think it is 'classless' to poke fun at Lisa Beamer in that article (one small remark, by the way), then I am curious what you think of her trademarking a phrase. THAT is classless, my friend.

John
tailgater Offline
#4 Posted: Tue, Feb 18 2003, 5:22 PM EST
Joined: 06-01-2000
Posts: 26,185
Whatever Lisa Beamer does is her business. I don't agree with the trademark rights, but I still maintain that it is classless to poke fun at her.
Your heart bleeds for those who ignore UN resolutions, yet you're cold to the American victims and their families.
Me pointing this out doesn't speak of the thickness of my skin.
Your head, on the otherhand...
jdrabinski Offline
#5 Posted: Tue, Feb 18 2003, 5:36 PM EST
Joined: 08-16-2002
Posts: 794
Explain, please, how I am 'cold' to victims and their families. Did you know that one of my best friends from college died in the WTC collapse? That his two kids won't have a father? That I think about this everyday? You haven't a clue. You don't know **** about me or how I feel about 'victims.' Do you care about Afghani victims? Or Iraqi victims? Or are only U.S. citizens worthy or your concern?

After you explain that, please explain how American victims have anything to do with the war in Iraq. There is no 9/11 connection here.

And, after you explain that, please also explain why you want the U.S. to act without UN support to enforce this particular violation of a resolution, yet we do nothing about, say, the many resolutions ignored by Israel, or countless other cases with other countries. Why THIS one? Or are you just woefully uninformed about the UN and its resolutions?

After all of that explaining, please fill me in on why suddenly North Korea is to be treated with kid's gloves and negotiated with. Yet Iraq needs to be bombed. Yeah, I guess that makes sense when you recall that GWB barely sqeaked by with a 2.0 gpa in college. Didn't do too well in logic, apparently.

Seems like Iraq has proven a lot more contained than North Korea.

John
tailgater Offline
#6 Posted: Tue, Feb 18 2003, 6:00 PM EST
Joined: 06-01-2000
Posts: 26,185
Whoa.
I'll try to rebut.
Your cold-heartedness towards US victims was shown in the link on the first post to this thread.
It's OK to be anti-Bush. You obviously are Self-first and America-second. (you LOVED when Bush "tried" to explain the protests). But to sprinkle your anti-American propaganda with insults to a Hero's family, well you should see the connection. Heck, you're skooled more than me, professor.
UN Resolutions? I bring those up because we fought a war with Iraq in the early '90s, and Iraq has not lived up to their end of the bargain when it comes to disarming. Bush simply needs to (once again) make up for Clintons 8 years of ineptitude, which was ignored by most because the stock market was doing well.
Whenever somebody says "give Iraq time", they don't understand how much time we're talking about.
North Korea?
What's HONESTLY a bigger threat in the immediate?
A country that has dangerous weapons and tells the world, or a country that consistently Hides their weapons even when the UN tells them to be forthright?
North Korea is not an immediate threat. They want leverage and respect, and they gained the latter by using the information that Clinton and Carter (remember him) sold to them.

tailgater Offline
#7 Posted: Tue, Feb 18 2003, 6:10 PM EST
Joined: 06-01-2000
Posts: 26,185
Make that "former", not "latter".
N.Korea has gained leverage, not respect.
Except in the hood/gangsta definition of "respect"...
xrundog Offline
#8 Posted: Tue, Feb 18 2003, 7:04 PM EST
Joined: 01-17-2002
Posts: 2,212
I imagine Mrs. Beamer Copyrighted her husband's last words so they wouldn't show up on the chest of some Aryan Militia groupie. The article reminds me of something I might have seen in a National Lampoon of days gone by. Ahhh nostalgia! Here's a different perspective. The resolution that Iraq has flaunted for years is a UN resolution. Enforcement is the responsibilty of the UN. Yes, the US plays a lead role in the UN. But it is critical that any action taken is initiated by the UN and NOT any one nation. Otherwise it is very clear that said nation is concerned with it's own agenda more than that of the UN. If that is so, The UN should move it's headquarters to Switzerland. That's the protester's point(or one of them). If it's not about oil, then we should abide by the UN's decision. Of course we should continue to try and convince the UN and everyone else, that it is an international security issue, and NOT about oil(it's not about oil, is it?).
jjohnson28 Offline
#9 Posted: Tue, Feb 18 2003, 9:21 PM EST
Joined: 09-12-2000
Posts: 7,914
Well now jdrabinski at least we can plainly see that you are either a blatent liar or an incredible fool.I do pitty your supposed students most of all though.

JJ
RICKAMAVEN Offline
#10 Posted: Wed, Feb 19 2003, 12:57 AM EST
Joined: 10-01-2000
Posts: 33,248
jdrabinski

by now you should see the minds with no synapses happening, posting cliches. i'm backing off for a week or so. i want to see it as a spectator.

you've only been given 2 choices, liar or a fool. i'm certain there are more choices, but many here cannot count or think past 2.

i look forward to the next exchange.

by the way, bush was appointed president. i believe the correct term is coup d'état.
jreddoch Offline
#11 Posted: Wed, Feb 19 2003, 2:00 AM EST
Joined: 12-30-2000
Posts: 1,309
Rick, a coup d'etat is the sudden, violent overthrow of a government, so it's the wrong term. If you use hyperbole too much- well, you know the story of the boy who cried wolf. Bush is not my favorite president, but he became the president in the way the Constitution provided. Maybe if the Dems pick a more inspiring candidate next time, things will change. I had zero enthusiasm for either candidate in '00.

I wish I could be as absolutlely sure about everything as you guys. Whether you're conservative or liberal, you appear to have absolute faith in your views. I tend to see both sides and am usually conflicted about any issue. Anyone else like that?
tarheel4lyf Offline
#12 Posted: Wed, Feb 19 2003, 5:16 AM EST
Joined: 09-23-2002
Posts: 2,543
http://www.un.org/aboutun/charter/index.html

Iraq has, on too many occasions to count, violated the UN Charter, yet they remain a member of the UN. This alone takes away the credibility of the UN, and should tell you how well the UN is at handling problems. The UN is outdated, and is in dire need of major changes in policy. The USA needs to look out for #1. Nobody else out there is going to.
Intel Offline
#13 Posted: Wed, Feb 19 2003, 5:25 AM EST
Joined: 06-24-2002
Posts: 546
Wow,
I have been sitting back and reading the banter going on back and forth. I must say all have points they feel are valid. Neither will change the others mind. Any response only serves to add fuel to the fire. I guess this is way most of us read and post to this forum. It reminds me of the stereo typical sixties family dinner. Dad is the: back the government at all cost kind of guy. Junior is the: hey I know what I'm talking about, you are just feeding into the man, I went to college, the President only had a 2.0 GPA, I have to be right, I don' know how to be wrong, peace child. Well I am going to throw my two cents into the ring. Until Secretary Powell gave his speech to the United nations I felt I needed more to back this war. Keep in mind I am about as Pro-American as it gets but one thing I love about this country is the freedom to disagree with it's leaders. Powell presented his case, the thing I found interesting was the expression on his face a few weeks later when the weapons inspectors gave their personal opinions about Iraq's cooperation Powell was visibly frustrated not at the fact the USA was being given a set back but because the inspectors where getting snowed. We will never know all the intelligence material the administration has to base their decision on, but when a person who does, looks like he looked you can tell he knows something. I for one trust him.
Mr.Mean Offline
#14 Posted: Wed, Feb 19 2003, 5:40 AM EST
Joined: 05-16-2001
Posts: 3,025
I just want to know what's in the three ships floating around with dead air that left port just before the inspections started.
tarheel4lyf Offline
#15 Posted: Wed, Feb 19 2003, 5:56 AM EST
Joined: 09-23-2002
Posts: 2,543
What ships? Give me more info, please.
Mr.Mean Offline
#16 Posted: Wed, Feb 19 2003, 8:08 AM EST
Joined: 05-16-2001
Posts: 3,025
It's been reported that three ships known to be used by Irag left a Syrian port just before the inspectors arrived. They have been at see, with no radio contact, flying no particular flag, going in circles basically. Boarding these vessels is feared due to possible consiquenses. No Maritime laws are being broken, there just out there doing nothing.
Mr.Mean Offline
#17 Posted: Wed, Feb 19 2003, 9:01 AM EST
Joined: 05-16-2001
Posts: 3,025
Am I the best speller here or what! Man I kick a$$!
tailgater Offline
#18 Posted: Thu, Feb 20 2003, 2:13 PM EST
Joined: 06-01-2000
Posts: 26,185
Those ships are filled with roses and chocolate. A late valentines gift from Saddam to Bush.
Saddam's a swell guy.
Why else would so many people protest ?

Users browsing this topic
Guest
Back to Top