Tweet"and me yet again the victor!"...dont you have to be victorius ONCE to be victorius "again"...i didnt twist anything there did i? you were implying that you have been victoriuos in the past, right? almost has an edge to it, like you believe your ALWAYS victorious...but, i'm not saying you said that...just saying

those are some great quotes...fantastic job. you should give the credit to the guy's original post or article, that supported your thinking, the credit for hooking you up and showing how to use them to your advantage...he deserve's it.

i'm not saying that anyone of those quotes are wrong or bad....but, as stated numerous times, the forefathers had no clue as to the future. those things that are said are strong, powerful, and great in idealology, but for you to use that to officialy back you arguments as if the founding fathers and great presidents of the past had this situation and you in mind when they said this, is funny...I'M NOT SAYING THAT YOU SPECIFICLY SAID THAT...JUST THE WAY YOU IMPLY IT....NOT TRYING TO TWIST YOUR WORDS OR ANYTHING....

TweetWOW! this has been some interesting reading and i have come to an easy conclusion on all this, djdiggler has done lots of research to back his claims and has formed an oppinion of the situation in iraq without allowing whatever the government says to grossly misguide him in forming his opinion.
horsepwr on the other hand seems to believe whatever the republican party tells him he should beleive.
come-on now, do you really think that settling a score his father had with hussein was any kind of reason to start a war and invade a country? that is absolutely absurd to even think that!
if we were so correct in invading iraq this tiem around why didnt anyone else in the world other than great britain support us, and look what happened to the prime minister there! he was forced to step down because of his wrongful support of a war that should not have ever been started in the first place.
concerning the attack on 9/11, it happened because america got way to complacent with their security and the al queda saw this and saw how vulnerable our country really was at the time.
the reason why there havent been any successful attacks on american soil after 9/11 is not because of our presence in iraq but because of our renewed awareness on security in this country.
our presence in iraq hasnt stopped terrorism in the slightest and if you think it did then just ask anyone who lives in britain about it!!!!!!
one other question i have is why did bush feel the need to put a democratic government in place in iraq when NO OTHER COUNTRY IN THE MIDDLE EAST HAS A DEMOCRATIC FORM OF GOVERNMENT!!!! that whole area of the world is led by dictatorships or familys and not by democratic government. it has only weakened iraq to have a government like ours that can never agree with each other enough to get anything good done for the country.
oh and one other thing, when the rich guy stated that he felt he didnt pay enough taxes i think considering 16% of his huge income is much less draining on him that 25% of someones income that is only in the $30,000-50,000 range. rich people make the most money and have the most control over what happens in this country so they should pay the highest percentage of taxes and not the lowest!!!!

Tweet

Originally Posted by daved150

"and me yet again the victor!"...dont you have to be victorius ONCE to be victorius "again"...i didnt twist anything there did i? you were implying that you have been victoriuos in the past, right? almost has an edge to it, like you believe your ALWAYS victorious...but, i'm not saying you said that...just saying

those are some great quotes...fantastic job. you should give the credit to the guy's original post or article, that supported your thinking, the credit for hooking you up and showing how to use them to your advantage...he deserve's it.

i'm not saying that anyone of those quotes are wrong or bad....but, as stated numerous times, the forefathers had no clue as to the future. those things that are said are strong, powerful, and great in idealology, but for you to use that to officialy back you arguments as if the founding fathers and great presidents of the past had this situation and you in mind when they said this, is funny...I'M NOT SAYING THAT YOU SPECIFICLY SAID THAT...JUST THE WAY YOU IMPLY IT....NOT TRYING TO TWIST YOUR WORDS OR ANYTHING....

Actually I do imply they had an idea of what the future will hold. Are you telling me that what is said in history is not important in the future? If anything history is one of the most important things because HISTORY REPEATS ITSELF! Our forefathers spoke of what they knew from the past, what they saw in the present, as well as what they forsaw happening in the future if certain precautions weren't taken.

For you to Imply that what they said is outdated and meaningless speaks in volume about your actual retention for the correlation between history, politics, and freedom. It is statements like this that take our society backwards instead of forwards.

and yes I am for the most part victorious as I am in the majority of the political debates. There have been a few where I was beaten but that was by Tmann and he doesn't debate anymore.

You as well as the others that are against me in these debates never provide any proof or anything that points to their opinions being correct. However when I do provide such proof you shoot it down with mere opinion, which again shows how inferior your rebuttal was to mine. Fact vs opinion.........only the educated know which one of those is the truth!

Tweethere is some interesting info that will also dispute horsepwr's argument. it is located on msnbc. here is the link to the article:
https://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/19717961/site/newsweek/
since horsepwr doesnt like to follow links and read the articles i will copy and paste part of it here.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
At the same time, however, last year’s NIE also warned that Al Qaeda had spawned a jihadi movement that had metastasized, and that radical jihadis were “increasing in both number and geographic dispersion.” One cause, the analysis concluded, was the U.S. invasion of Iraq—which intelligence officials said had become a “cause celebre for jihadists, breeding a deep resentment of U.S. involvement in the Muslim world and cultivating supporters for the global jihaidst movement.”

But the new NIE’s conclusions about Al Qaeda activities in Pakistan, along with the increasing signs of jihadi militants flowing out of Iraq, suggest that the U.S. counterterrorism community may now be facing the worst of both worlds: a reconstituted Al Qaeda leadership coupled with a growing and dispersed worldwide army of angry jihadis inflamed by the U.S. presence in Iraq. The new document’s conclusions also could make it more difficult for the White House to argue, as it frequently has in the past, that President Bush’s post-9/11 efforts have made the country “safer.”

TweetWow good post! That was a serious blow there! I'd rep you again if I hadn't done it already.........

TweetGee horsepower & daved I wonder what caused this?

Al qaida has rebuilt U.S. intel warns

By MATTHEW LEE and KATHERINE SHRADER, Associated Press Writers
46 minutes ago



WASHINGTON - A new threat assessment from U.S. counterterrorism analysts says that al-Qaida has used its safe haven along the Afghan-Pakistan border to restore its operating capabilities to a level unseen since the months before Sept. 11, 2001.

A counterterrorism official familiar with a five-page summary of the document — titled "Al-Qaida better positioned to strike the West" — called it a stark appraisal. The analysis will be part of a broader meeting at the White House on Thursday about an upcoming National Intelligence Estimate.

The official and others spoke to The Associated Press on condition they not be identified because the report remains classified.

The findings suggests that the network that launched the most devastating terror attack on U.S. soil has been able to regroup despite nearly six years of bombings, war and other tactics aimed at dismantling it.

At his news conference Thursday, President Bush acknowledged the report's existence and al-Qaida's continuing threat to the United States. He said, however, that the report refers only to al-Qaida's strength in 2001, not prior to the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001. The group was at its strongest throughout most of that year, with well-established training camps in Afghanistan, recruitment networks and command structures.

Bush used the new threat assessment to show his administration's policies are the right course.

"Because of the actions we've taken, al-Qaida is weaker today than they would have been," he said. "They are still a threat. They are still dangerous. And that is why it is important that we succeed in Afghanistan and Iraq and anywhere else we find them."

The threat assessment focuses on the terror group's safe haven in Pakistan and makes a range of observations about the threat posed to the United States and its allies, officials said.

Counterterrorism officials have been increasingly concerned about al-Qaida's recent operations. This week, Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff said he had a "gut feeling" that the United States faced a heightened risk of attack this summer.

Still, numerous government officials say they know of no specific, credible threat of a new attack on U.S. soil.

And Chertoff repeated that Thursday during appearances on morning television news shows. But in an interview on NBC's "Today" show, he also said officials believe "we're entering a period" of increased risk.

Asked on ABC's "Good Morning America" to explain al-Qaida's continuing strength nearly six years after the Sept. 11 attacks in the United States, Chertoff said, "It reflects the fact that just as we improve our defenses, the enemy tries to improve its defenses and rebuild itself."

Al-Qaida is "considerably operationally stronger than a year ago" and has "regrouped to an extent not seen since 2001," the counterterrorism official said, paraphrasing the report's conclusions. "They are showing greater and greater ability to plan attacks in Europe and the United States."

The group also has created "the most robust training program since 2001, with an interest in using European operatives," the official quoted the report as saying.

At the same time, this official said, the report speaks of "significant gaps in intelligence" so U.S. authorities may be ignorant of potential or planned attacks.

John Kringen, who heads the CIA's analysis directorate, echoed the concerns about al-Qaida's resurgence during testimony and conversations with reporters at a House Armed Services Committee hearing on Wednesday.

"They seem to be fairly well settled into the safe haven and the ungoverned spaces of Pakistan," Kringen testified. "We see more training. We see more money. We see more communications. We see that activity rising."

The threat assessment comes as the 16 U.S. intelligence agencies prepare a National Intelligence Estimate focusing on threats to the United States. A senior intelligence official, who spoke on condition of anonymity while the high-level analysis was being completed, said the document has been in the works for roughly two years.

Kringen and aides to National Intelligence Director Mike McConnell would not comment on the details of that analysis.

"Preparation of the estimate is not a response to any specific threat," McConnell's spokesman Ross Feinstein said, adding that it probably will be ready for distribution this summer.

Kringen said he wouldn't attach a summer time frame to the concern. In studying the threat, he said he begins with the premise that al-Qaida would consider attacking the U.S. a "home run hit" and that the easiest way to get into the United States would be through Europe.

Several European countries — among them Britain, Denmark, Germany and the Netherlands — are highlighted in the threat assessment partly because they have arrangements with the Pakistani government that allow their citizens easier access to Pakistan than others, according to the counterterrorism official.

This is more troubling because all four are part of the U.S. visa waiver program, and their citizens can enter the United States without additional security scrutiny, the official said.

The Bush administration has repeatedly cited al-Qaida as a key justification for continuing the fight in Iraq.

"The No. 1 enemy in Iraq is al-Qaida," White House press secretary Tony Snow said Wednesday. "Al-Qaida continues to be the chief organizer of mayhem within Iraq."

The findings could bolster the president's hand at a moment when support on Capitol Hill for the war is eroding and the administration is struggling to defend its decision for a military buildup in Iraq.

The threat assessment says that al-Qaida stepped up efforts to "improve its core operational capability" in late 2004 but did not succeed until December of 2006 after the Pakistani government signed a peace agreement with tribal leaders that effectively removed government military presence from the northwest frontier with Afghanistan.

The agreement allows Taliban and al-Qaida operatives to move across the border with impunity and establish and run training centers, the report says, according to the official.

It also says that al-Qaida is particularly interested in building up the numbers in its middle ranks, or operational positions, so there is not as great a lag in attacks when such people are killed.

"Being No. 3 in al-Qaida is a bad job. We regularly get to the No. 3 person," Tom Fingar, the top U.S. intelligence analyst, told the House panel.

The report also notes that al-Qaida has increased its public statements, although analysts stressed that those video and audio messages aren't reliable indicators of the actions the group may take.

Tweetdj, please show me...in any thread...ever....anywhere on this board, or any other, where i said the iraqi war WOULD NOT breed more terrorists.

show me, one time where i said, ever, in any thread on any board, that the attacks on 9/11 was anything but terrorist's. as pincusher so pointed out, we was attaked by terrorist's becouse of our own lackadasical security.....we dropped the ball that allowed that to happen. NOT a conspieracy!! the bullshyt came after the 9/11 attack...like i've ALWAYS said! again, i believe there are many reasons we've went into iraq....i still fail to see your 9/11 insurance scamming, goverment planned proof. everything you have offered for proof on most things, a counter point can be found on the inter-net. becouse i dont have near as much time as you, or maybe, i just dont have near as much intrest as you, does not mean it aint there...probobly why t just quit and moved on...it would never end....

oh, and next time you feel the urge to whine that i twist your words, re-read some of your responces to me....you very prone to doing twisting of your own bro.

as far as being against you, i am getting a little tired of saying this to you, so maybe you can copy and paste it somewhere to remember...i dont disagree 100% with everything you say...never EVER have i said i did, and again, i invite you to show me the post inwitch i claim that....our biggest disagreement is in the fact that you believe 9/11 was a goverment planned and sanctioned event...i 100% disagree. some of the stuff you say inregards to the war in iraq, i agree with...alot i dont. easy as that

TweetSo go and find what I twisted on you. I clearly have shown you what you twisted. I'd love for you to show me what I twisted, not by you merely saying it, but by quoting it from one of my posts.

Yes we were starting to see eye to eye on things, then all of a sudden the team of decepticons form up again and you decide to go back to the dark side. So yes as soon as you do that, your posts start losing their logic & direction again.

I know some of the stuff I say is mere speculation, but those things I ask you to prove otherwise. I provide links, you provide opinions. If you were to show scientific proof to back up your theory with links, I'd be more than happy to watch or read them. I post the links and if you do watch them, you watch about ten seconds of them with a closed mind.

Just so you know I'd love for you to prove me wrong! Why? Because I'd love nothing more than to find out it's all a big misunderstanding and our government wasn't corrupt. The chances of you proving that are few and far between. Furthermore You've never once taken the time to point out logical reasoning why any of the 9/11 conpiracy theories were wrong. Instead again you pull the classic Bush follower path which is talk about terror (or terra as bush followers call it), and use that is your answer to all rebuttal.

It's gotten so bad even cartoons mock it out. The simpsons mock it out, Family guy mocks it out, TV mocks it out, Comics mock it out. It's ridiculous how big of a percentage of americans are that easily fooled that terror and terrorist can be used as an excuse for everything without people getting suspicious of what is really going on here.

Tweetso, again...i'm wrong. it was not terrorists that flew a plane into the trade centers (how dare i, the ultimate bush backer, that didnt even vote for the dumbasz, suggest that actual "terrorist" would do such a thing)...your right, it was the greatest insurance scam in history...(now, make sure you re-but and tell me you didnt say that...make sure you demand i go through ALL the former threads and find that. and, make ABSOLUTE sure that you INSIST i twisted something that you said, becouse you wouldnt say that)....dude...honestly, it dosnt matter what i post for a rebuttle...your mind is so poisoned against this evil country, that you'd never see the light...it wont matter when the focus of your hatred, the evil mr bush, leaves office, you'll find yet another person to blame all the worlds problems on...that's what you do. dont worry, this guy gave ya a good run, sure. but, the next admin. will probobly do something that you and the other conspierecy theorist's can use to continue hating on...you dont have to blow your whole wad becouse he's winding down...they'll be another president, you watch.

TweetHey dj. I think for myself and draw my own conclusions. Something I can tell you don't. Before you go off telling someone they're retarted just because they don't jerkoff to politics like you do, check yourself. I have a decent thought process and was in gifted and advanced programs through grade school. Tested 137 I.Q. I do pretty well at things that catch my interest. Politics just never did it for me so I'll be the first to tell you you'd get me every time in a political debate there brother. I give you no credit for forming an opinion of your own because from what it looks like you just eat anything you read. I'm sorry I haven't taken the time to read your links. I'll actually try to get to some of them so you don't feel you did the research for nothing. I have the news on in the morning as I get ready and catch it some in the evenings and some bs now and then before I'm out in bed which isn't 2 minutes after I level out. I'll give it to you, you've done your homework. It sounds like you have let the twisted world of politics warp your mind actually. I know we are in a fuked up way. We have been long before even you probably new which is hard to believe. I would think you know more than the dam CIA from the sound of it. And again, I'm for taking whatever action required to keep the world a safe place. Now, just because I made that statement doesn't mean that I feel we have done the right things. You will take anything someone says and twist the hell out of it to put them down, make them sound inferior to the all mighty politician dikdiggler and put them where you want them to be, which from this thread is allot of the time the total opposite of what we're saying. That's why I said your reading and comprehension is off because it's like you either don't get it half the time or you're just deliberately doing that to make someone look bad.

Where have I said that I am for the invasion of Iraq?

Where have I implied that Bush has done an excellent job?

I could go on but this thread has gotten tiring and ya can't get anywhere with you. And yes dj, you win the political debate...squirt,squirt...yay..meaningless. You post things that have been authored by others and dodge questions that require YOUR answer. Remember this thread and I'm sure you will in a few years.

You are exactly what you claim to hate bro.

What did your friends do in Iraq that told you they were fighting for oil?

What would you say when we aren't controling Iraq's oil export? Just for the record.

Tweetsee damit...it's 9:30 and I'm up. I don't have time to run a political campaign like dj and Miss Sheehan or whatever her name is...Mike Moore and all you guys. ughhhh

Tweet

Originally Posted by daved150

so, again...i'm wrong. it was not terrorists that flew a plane into the trade centers (how dare i, the ultimate bush backer, that didnt even vote for the dumbasz, suggest that actual "terrorist" would do such a thing)...your right, it was the greatest insurance scam in history...(now, make sure you re-but and tell me you didnt say that...make sure you demand i go through ALL the former threads and find that. and, make ABSOLUTE sure that you INSIST i twisted something that you said, becouse you wouldnt say that)....dude...honestly, it dosnt matter what i post for a rebuttle...your mind is so poisoned against this evil country, that you'd never see the light...it wont matter when the focus of your hatred, the evil mr bush, leaves office, you'll find yet another person to blame all the worlds problems on...that's what you do. dont worry, this guy gave ya a good run, sure. but, the next admin. will probobly do something that you and the other conspierecy theorist's can use to continue hating on...you dont have to blow your whole wad becouse he's winding down...they'll be another president, you watch.

That's absolutely a ridiculous statement. For one I don't hate my country, I hate the administration running it, and how widely corruption has spread through our government. Before Bush I had no clue, nor reason to look into corruption. But as our country went further down the rabbit hole, I started getting curious and questioning things.

When I started learning things, and was asked questions that I couldn't answer I started to realize that maybe it isn't so far fetched that this was a conspiracy. So I started doing more research. I quickly learned how corruption and conspiracy has run rampant through our government for ages! It just seems to have peaked and become more open whereas they used to be smart enough to hide it, or so I thought.

When I watched in utter surprise that a huge segment of americans were accepting all of the attrocities being done to our freedoms, and our countries great name with open arms, I then realized that the current administrations openness with much of it's corruptiveness was much more ingenious than those of the past who worked so hard to hide it. The sole act of being open gives off the aura of truth, therefore giving people reason to convince themselves that what their innerself is saying is wrong, whereas at the same time they know it's right but are not willing to admit it for fear of not seeming patriotic. This is a term referred to as 'Doublethink'. Just by reading many of the posts of those that oppose me you can see Doublethink at work. Learning this alone has shown me that I am wrong of one thing and that is that Bush and his administration are not stupid but extremely calculated and ingenius. They have romanced people under the facade of terror that they give up all rights and relinquish any sympathy they might have had for the innocents of other countries that would become victims of the american war machine. That in and of itself is absolutely brilliant!

As for saying I will always hate the president, and government again you are putting words in my mouth and misdirecting my words. Before Bush I had no problem with government (and still don't hate all forms of government), as I mentioned. However as I also mentioned that is solely because I had no reason to look into it. I feel if someone like Ron Paul were to get in office and stick to his promises I'd have not negative feelings for him or his administration. I think your right that I would always hate certain factions of the government, which would be the corrupt ones. Which ones those would be I don't know now, because I can't forsee the future. But I also have a strong feeling that if Ron Paul made it as president he would curb a majority of corruption, and make a much needed change this country needs.

Tweet

Originally Posted by horsepwr

Hey dj. I think for myself and draw my own conclusions. Something I can tell you don't. Before you go off telling someone they're retarted just because they don't jerkoff to politics like you do, check yourself. I have a decent thought process and was in gifted and advanced programs through grade school. Tested 137 I.Q. I do pretty well at things that catch my interest. Politics just never did it for me so I'll be the first to tell you you'd get me every time in a political debate there brother. I give you no credit for forming an opinion of your own because from what it looks like you just eat anything you read. I'm sorry I haven't taken the time to read your links. I'll actually try to get to some of them so you don't feel you did the research for nothing. I have the news on in the morning as I get ready and catch it some in the evenings and some bs now and then before I'm out in bed which isn't 2 minutes after I level out. I'll give it to you, you've done your homework. It sounds like you have let the twisted world of politics warp your mind actually. I know we are in a fuked up way. We have been long before even you probably new which is hard to believe. I would think you know more than the dam CIA from the sound of it. And again, I'm for taking whatever action required to keep the world a safe place. Now, just because I made that statement doesn't mean that I feel we have done the right things. You will take anything someone says and twist the hell out of it to put them down, make them sound inferior to the all mighty politician dikdiggler and put them where you want them to be, which from this thread is allot of the time the total opposite of what we're saying. That's why I said your reading and comprehension is off because it's like you either don't get it half the time or you're just deliberately doing that to make someone look bad.

Where have I said that I am for the invasion of Iraq?

Where have I implied that Bush has done an excellent job?

I could go on but this thread has gotten tiring and ya can't get anywhere with you. And yes dj, you win the political debate...squirt,squirt...yay..meaningless. You post things that have been authored by others and dodge questions that require YOUR answer. Remember this thread and I'm sure you will in a few years.

You are exactly what you claim to hate bro.

What did your friends do in Iraq that told you they were fighting for oil?

What would you say when we aren't controling Iraq's oil export? Just for the record.

First off I said your post was borderline retarded and quite frankly that was my opinion. I made sure to voice my opinion on that one solely because you decided that directly insulting by saying I had a "Tiny thought process" was a good form of debating. It's different if you wanted to instigate a little back and forth like daved and I do without directly really taking shots at each other, but you decided yet again to cross the line and act immature.

Then you go off to call me dikdiggler? Wow real mature! What are you in third grade? That was so clever! Honestly I can see you have a 137 IQ after seeing that amazingly clever comeback, your mind boggling rebuttals, and of course your in depth preperation of something you want to argue. Just to make sure you know this......I'm being sarcastic about most of that!

Now about your superior IQ of 137. It's been my experience that anyone that needs to brag about their IQ level is almost always overinflating themselves to compensate for some form of inferiority complex. I guess in this case it would be because not only does my vernacular devastate yours in this debate, but you can't answer back to anything I say with solid answers. You are forced to beat around the bush and hope the battle will dissipate. Well I've got news for you it won't!

A last point of yours I'd like to bring up and shoot down. You say that and I quote " I give you no credit for forming an opinion of your own because from what it looks like you just eat anything you read."

Well this couldn't be farther from the truth. You in your vast knowledge of politics seem to think that because I do expansive research by reading, watching videos, and studying history that it makes my opinion false and not my own, but only the opinion of others. First off anyone with TRUE intelligence would know that in order to form an opinion of anything you must look at both sides of the coin and the truth usually falls between the line. It takes research to form an educated opinion. I never once said I was a political genius, nor did I say I was superior to everyone on the planet. I just insinuated that I am superior in my debates here because the majority of those that oppose me do no research, and then use rebuttals that are mere opinion that they formed by doing little or no research. That of course would make me superior in a debate because I am better prepared. So again if your IQ was so superior you would understand that to form an opinion you do need to read and do research. Educated opinions don't just fall out of thin air, like yours has. You say my opinion isn't my own? Who's the one that takes what they hear specifically from the news and uses that and only that to form their opinion?

So you said I need to check myself? No, no my friend, your the one that needs to check yourself!