Strange Famous

I think that anyone, regardless of political belief, must be disgusted that this woman's rantings are so heavily publicized. American law may guarantee free speech, but why would anyone publish this sort of thing, other than as an example of awfulness


http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmp...how911happened

__________________
"Do not tell lies, and do not do what you hate,
for all things are plain in the sight of Heaven. For nothing
hidden will not become manifest, and nothing covered will remain
without being uncovered."

The Gospel of Thomas

Stare At The Sun

Because, of a little thing called "the freedom of press". She's well known, and its news. News generates readers, and readers generate advertising. You do realize that newspapers want to make money, and that controvertial stuff like Ann is a sure fire way to get publicity and more readers.

Sorry you don't agree with what she says. I don't agree with what she says, however, disgusted? Not so much.

matthew330

Great article, thanks for the post SF.

lurkette

Meh. I just ignore her. Her arguments are so biased, so obviously full of logical holes, so spiteful, that it's hard to believe anybody actually takes them seriously, and it's sad that any grain of truth in them gets lost behind her publicity-hounding vendetta against all things liberal. She gets published because she gets attention.

__________________
"If ten million people believe a foolish thing, it is still a foolish thing."

- Anatole France

Lebell

Aside from a nonsensical title to the thread that has nothing to do with the article, what about it is wrong?

__________________
"Of all tyrannies, a tyranny exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It may be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end, for they do so with the approval of their own conscience." – C. S. Lewis

The ONLY sponsors we have are YOU!

Please Donate!

Sparhawk

Take your anger out on this:

__________________
"In Iraq, no doubt about it, it's tough. It's hard work. It's incredibly hard. It's - and it's hard work. I understand how hard it is. I get the casualty reports every day. I see on the TV screens how hard it is. But it's necessary work. We're making progress. It is hard work."

reconmike

Everything that I read in that post of her "ranting" is true, so where is the problem?

__________________
Where is Darwin when ya need him?

onetime2

IMO, she wrongfully praises Republicans for "retaliating against terrorism". No President from Carter forward to Clinton has done anything significant to combat terrorism. The policy was one of ignoring the situation with the hope that a lack of press and reaction would diffuse the situation. Leadership involves doing things that are unpopular when you know they are right. Reagan didn't follow through with his plans and that helped to lead the US toward 9/11.

Additionally, the whole Monica Lewinsky argument is out of place and assinine.

__________________
Strive to be more curious than ignorant.

Lebell

Actually, I think he did. I do however think that George Bush Sr. didn't do enough.

__________________
"Of all tyrannies, a tyranny exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It may be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end, for they do so with the approval of their own conscience." – C. S. Lewis

The ONLY sponsors we have are YOU!

Please Donate!

Strange Famous

Implied support of Serbian war crimes against Muslims

Apparent approval of dropping a bomb on the French embassy, which if it was a "mistake" rather than a mistake, would have been an act of war, which at very best would have caused a break down in trade between American and most of Europe which would have damaged both economies

Approval of the policy of inciting war between and arming both Iran and Iraq, a conflict that cost millions of lives - which she believes was Reagan's policy.

Constant demonising of Muslims and approval of violence against Muslim people in retaliation for any crimes carried out by unrelated Muslims 9 (for example - Libya harbors a terrorist who kills a US soldier, therefore America bomb Libya and kill Gaddhafi's daughter and this is great)

The intent of the article is to dehumanize Muslims, and to incite violence against Muslims, in all but words Coulter is calling for a holy war against Islam.

Attempting to politicize a terrorist attack against America and claim it only happened because of Clinton

Constant disregard and contempt for the Muslim victimes of the killings she lists.

An inaccurate and wrong headed understanding of current events... do we really believe, for example, the American actions in Iraq and Afghanistan have made Islam more friendly to America? Do we believe that the chances of American's being killed in conflict with any Islamic groups have now vastly decreased?

__________________
"Do not tell lies, and do not do what you hate,
for all things are plain in the sight of Heaven. For nothing
hidden will not become manifest, and nothing covered will remain
without being uncovered."

The Gospel of Thomas

Lebell

Strange Famous,

I've said it before and I can only say it again:

You and I live in very different worlds.

I can't even begin to talk politics with you because we can't even agree on the facts.

Where I see white, you see black.


So with all sincerity, I wish you peace.

__________________
"Of all tyrannies, a tyranny exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It may be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end, for they do so with the approval of their own conscience." – C. S. Lewis

The ONLY sponsors we have are YOU!

Please Donate!

onetime2

There's no chance he did enough. The bombing of the US Marine barracks was the first significant instance of the paper tiger syndrome in the face of terrorism. Dropping a couple of bombs is not sufficient. They paid no real price for their attack and they continued their attacks against the US. They got bolder and bolder and killed more and more.

__________________
Strive to be more curious than ignorant.

Lebell

That I completely agree with.

Unfortunately, that led to the first WTC bombing which Clinton did absolutely nothing in response, which of course led to the second one.

__________________
"Of all tyrannies, a tyranny exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It may be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end, for they do so with the approval of their own conscience." – C. S. Lewis

The ONLY sponsors we have are YOU!

Please Donate!

Ustwo

Lets not forget Somalia, the USS Cole, and the bombings in Africa too.

__________________
Agents of the enemies who hold office in our own government, who attempt to eliminate our "freedoms" and our "right to know" are posting among us, I fear.....on this very forum. - host

Obama - Know a Man by the friends he keeps.

onetime2

All the attacks over the last several decades (and the lack of significant response) built off one another.

__________________
Strive to be more curious than ignorant.

filtherton

She's right. If only clinton hadn't made bush sit around salivating over saddam hussein with his thumb up his ass for the first nine months of his term.

Moving on. I think to be fair, and to follow the logic of the great conservashrew coulter, all future terrorist attacks including the train bombings in madrid should be blamed on the commander in chief george bush. Obviously one cannot ignore the current state of world affairs as being the sole responsibility of that one person.

Watch out! I'm getting "factual" like coulter!!

Sparhawk

How about capturing those responsible, putting them on trial, and putting them in a 6x8 box for the rest of their lives? Or does that not factor into "absolutely nothing" because Clinton wasn't directly responsible for it?

__________________
"In Iraq, no doubt about it, it's tough. It's hard work. It's incredibly hard. It's - and it's hard work. I understand how hard it is. I get the casualty reports every day. I see on the TV screens how hard it is. But it's necessary work. We're making progress. It is hard work."

Averett

I bet the families of the soldiers that have been killed since we "won" the war in Iraq would have something to say with this statement.

We obviously haven't won shit there.

__________________
Absence is to love what wind is to fire. It extinguishes the small, it enkindles the great.

filtherton

You must have missed the "Mission Accomplished" banner from ye olde aircraft carrier.

Averett

Ooh yeah. Forgot all about that

__________________
Absence is to love what wind is to fire. It extinguishes the small, it enkindles the great.

Lebell

You are right, I should have mentioned that.

But obviously it wasn't enough.

Clinton pruned a branch without going to the root of the evil: The countries and people overseas who financed and supported the bombers.

__________________
"Of all tyrannies, a tyranny exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It may be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end, for they do so with the approval of their own conscience." – C. S. Lewis

The ONLY sponsors we have are YOU!

Please Donate!

reconmike

It must be nice living life looking through left leaning glasses.

What Coulter was SHOWING was the presidental responses to terrorist attacks.
When someone smacks you upside the head and you DO NOTHING you are perceived as weak.

And when 100 thousand plus foriegn troops are scattered all over your country you have been defeated in a war.

__________________
Where is Darwin when ya need him?

Lebell

Don't forget, a successfully deposed dictator, the majority of the populace believing they are better off and a few hundred American casualities means it is "Bush's Vietnam".

__________________
"Of all tyrannies, a tyranny exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It may be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end, for they do so with the approval of their own conscience." – C. S. Lewis

The ONLY sponsors we have are YOU!

Please Donate!

filtherton

Nope, an increasingly hostile occupation + tenuous grip on the future of iraq + no clear exit strategy = bush's vietnam.

Incidentally, is it still too soon to dust off "quagmire"?

It's a lot nicer than getting life on play-by-play from anne coulter.

I guess i missed how we got from her simply SHOWING the presidential response to terrorism to mindless clinton bashing. Not that i love clinton, it just seems like the right treats him like a red-headed step-child while all repubs get a pass.

I was simply showing my perception of the facts that she left out surrounding bush's responses to terrorism.

How is it that iraq is even mentioned in an article about reactions to terrorism? Bush even admitted that iraq had nothing to do with 9/11. He's been dry humping his iraq doll since before he was even inaugurated. That was before terrorism was a big deal to him.

Lebell

I will agree that if we let the hippy crowd run things now like we did in the 60's, then it will turn into a "quagmire".

But right now, there is a strategy that involves using the force necessary to answer attacks and proceeding with our plans even though those attacks are meant to derail them.

Or maybe we could appease everyone like Spain did and win that way. It certainly seems to have worked for them...

http://news.independent.co.uk/europe...p?story=508882

__________________
"Of all tyrannies, a tyranny exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It may be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end, for they do so with the approval of their own conscience." – C. S. Lewis

The ONLY sponsors we have are YOU!

Please Donate!

Kadath

So, because "appeasement" (also known as "voting for the party you most agree with") gets the same reaction as pressing the attack (i.e., the continued threat of terrorism) it's a failure? What does that say about our own strategy? Is it a failure as well? I suppose not; our troops are still getting killed.

__________________
it's quiet in here

filtherton

Hippies like nixon and johnson? Yes, that's right. I forgot that the hippies were responsible for planning major combat strategies and fighting a losing war against an underdog enemy. Sweet revisionism, thy taste is like honeydrops.

I know the strategy. I don't know if it will work. I hate to be pessimistic, but i don't see how this situation could possibly be under control in 90 days when we're due to hand over power.

The spanish government is pulling out of a war that most of its people didn't want to participate in. I hope you're aware that the only links iraq has to al qaeda were the ones that have sprouted up as a result of our invasion. Perhaps the people of spain want to concentrate on terrorism as opposed to sacrificing the lives of their countrymen and women for an american grudge-war. This would make sense when you take into account the fact that spain is not pulling out of afghanistan, just iraq.

To you this is appeasement? Fair enough, we're all entitled to interpret events with our own set of eyes. If you want a more accurate image of appeasement, see the u.s. alliance with uzbekistan. C'mon, how ironic is it for an american citizen to denounce another country for appeasement. We're the appeasingest appeasers in appeasington.

Furthermore, you're in no position to judge the bahavior of the spanish. For one, you don't know if they will bow to these demands. They were already going to pull out of iraq. I'd be surprised if they pulled out of afghanistan, but that's just me.

How many threats have they gotten due to their "appeasement"? I've only heard of this one. How many threats has the u.s. gotten with our philosophy of selective non iraq/afghani
appeasment?

irateplatypus

i've read this article twice and can't for the life of me justify the title of this thread.

the article is 95% recitation of historical fact. granted, the choice of dates and events were probably tailored to support her intent, but i don't see why this contributes to the idea that she is vile.

if you can disprove the veracity of her writing, do that. if you can't and are still offended, ask yourself why the dry presentation of fact offends you so much and articulate a logically sound response... if you are able.

i must say, on a personal note, that i resent anyone that says we "haven't won shit there." to debate about the merits of our actions is one thing but to deny the efficacy of our military operations displays a lack of knowledge of the situation.

__________________
If you will not fight when your victory will be sure and not too costly, you may come to the moment when you will have to fight with all the odds against you and only a precarious chance for survival. There may even be a worse case. You may have to fight when there is no hope of victory, because it is better to perish than to live as slaves.

~ Winston Churchill

Sparhawk

If you called say General Westmoreland or Richard Nixon a hippy, well, I'd like to see what happens.

And I'm not convinced that there is a strategy, except for making sure we wash our hands of it before the election, so it can be touted as another successful battleground in the war on terror.

As for your last bullet, that link is dated yesterday. The new prime minister said several weeks ago that he would withdraw troops from Iraq. But how exactly is he appeasing the fundamentalists when he says he'll be increasing troop levels in Afghanistan?

__________________
"In Iraq, no doubt about it, it's tough. It's hard work. It's incredibly hard. It's - and it's hard work. I understand how hard it is. I get the casualty reports every day. I see on the TV screens how hard it is. But it's necessary work. We're making progress. It is hard work."

Strange Famous

Iraq has definitely lost the war, but I dont see how America have won it? They have plunged the country into a civil war which they are themselves now hopelessly trapped in.

__________________
"Do not tell lies, and do not do what you hate,
for all things are plain in the sight of Heaven. For nothing
hidden will not become manifest, and nothing covered will remain
without being uncovered."

The Gospel of Thomas

mml

As usual, Coulter takes things and lays them out in a manner that fits her view of the world. There is really nothing wrong with this, we all do it to some extent, she is just more viscious than most (and more successful than most). The real thing that got my attention was the lashing out at Clarke. Clearly she got the memo from Mr. Rove and the RNC about doing whatever it takes to slur him without actually addressing the issues he brings up.

As far as being disgusted, no I am not. I am dissapointed that so many people buy into her sludge, but I am proud that I live in a country where she has the right to say these things (and things like McCarthy was a righteous hero) and I have the right to say she is a misguided, self-absorbed fool.(Who, as I have said time and time agiain, is laughing all the way to the bank.)

__________________
Human beings, who are almost unique in having the ability to learn from the experience of others, are also remarkable for their apparent disinclination to do so."
-Douglas Adams

irateplatypus

Strange Famous, do you know what a civil war is?

::in my best Inigo Montoya (from Princess Bride) voice:: You keep using that word. I don't think it means what you think it means.

__________________
If you will not fight when your victory will be sure and not too costly, you may come to the moment when you will have to fight with all the odds against you and only a precarious chance for survival. There may even be a worse case. You may have to fight when there is no hope of victory, because it is better to perish than to live as slaves.

~ Winston Churchill

Ustwo

When the going gets tough, the though give up?

You live in a very different world then ANYONE I know. Its a shame you don't seem happy in it.

There are 5 MILLION Iraqis in and around Bagdad. There are weapons all over the place. If the Iraqi people wanted to kick the US out, they could do so in a matter of hours.

A small % of the militants, spurred on by Syria and Iran, does not a civil war make.

__________________
Agents of the enemies who hold office in our own government, who attempt to eliminate our "freedoms" and our "right to know" are posting among us, I fear.....on this very forum. - host

Obama - Know a Man by the friends he keeps.

Superbelt

Talking point directly from Rush. Yes I was listening today.

And it was debunked by the Administration today as well. Now, this is at the press conference that was all over Cable News from 3-4, Fox & CNN and whatever. A reporter pointedly asked Rumsfeld if Iran was contributing to the hostilities in Iraq. Rumsfeld, who we can only assume has more complete intelligence reports than Rush can get his oxycontin stained hands on, said that he has no evidence that Iran is involved in either Manpower or material support of insurgents in Iraq.

Sparhawk

Hmmm. While I don't see a civil war, I see the potential for one. But as far as percentages of population being some sort of requirement for civil war/revolution - Lenin took power in Russia with only several thousand Bolsheviks, in a country of 100 million. Our own revolutionary war was fought with relatively small numbers of men in comparison to total population.

__________________
"In Iraq, no doubt about it, it's tough. It's hard work. It's incredibly hard. It's - and it's hard work. I understand how hard it is. I get the casualty reports every day. I see on the TV screens how hard it is. But it's necessary work. We're making progress. It is hard work."

Mojo_PeiPei

I mean I can say either way, but looking at this all historically I'd say there is a solid chance of Iranian agents in Iraq amping the Shiite population. Thats the same reason the Iran-Iraq war was fought. So again I wouldn't be surprised if Iran was on the inside pushing for an Islamic state similar to its own.

__________________
To win a war you must serve no master but your ambition.

fuzyfuzer

you know i really do find it interesting that under clarke we did very little compared to today and now that wea re not going his do nothing way he has left and attacking the administration to me this just kind of sounds childish and as it turns out i have lost any respect i had for him

__________________
"The difference between commiment and involvment is like a ham and egg breakfast the chicken was involved but the pig was commited"

"Thrice happy is the nation that has a glorious history. Far better it is to dare mighty things, to win glorious triumphs, even though checkered by failure, than to take rank with those poor spirits who neither enjoy much nor suffer much, because they live in the gray twilight that knows neither victory nor defeat." Theodore Roosevelt

Superbelt

Mojo, I understand. And it makes sense to me too.
But it would be in the Admin's best interest to point to and proclaim evidence that Iran is spurning the uprisings in Iraq. That he made it all too clear that we have no evidence that they are providing any support means a lot to me.

Zeld2.0

I still find it funny how Vietnam was ruined by "hippies" when the guy who eventually pulled the troops out with an "honorable peace" was Nixon who if you called a hippy would...

Oh who cares fill in the blank

Lebell

Nonsense and other words.

The socialists were likely to lose until those trains were bombed. The Spanish public then panicked and voted for the socialists who said they would get out of Iraq.

Well guess what, like blackmailers, once you start bargaining with terrorists you never stop.

And yes, troops will continue to get killed because the extremists will not stop.

Just the same way that civilians will continue to be killed even if we pulled out and gave in.

__________________
"Of all tyrannies, a tyranny exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It may be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end, for they do so with the approval of their own conscience." – C. S. Lewis

The ONLY sponsors we have are YOU!

Please Donate!