Somehow I was cursed with naive optimism. I figured nearly 10 years after 9/11, the idea that US foreign policy had a significant effect on the causes of 9/11 would be a rather non-controversial idea. I figured that even the conservatives here were sophicated enough to understand the rather simple concept that the CIA calls "blowback". I guess I was wrong.

In the days following 9/11, a lot of Americans began to ask the question "why?" The Bush administration had a rather simple boneheaded explaination. "They hate us for our freedom!" No one from the administration ever explained if that was the case, why terrorists weren't blowing up Amsterdam instead.

Two days after 9/11, leaders of the Christian conservative movement, Pat Robertson and Jerry Falwell said that America deserved 9/11, and blamed the ACLU and homosexuals for it.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H-CAcdta_8I

Leftist activists had another explanation. That 9/11 was caused by a set of US foreign policy decisions dating back some 20 years. Michael Moore summed this up rather beautifully in 2 & half minutes.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=imOU9SK_q0I

And yet, in trailer parks across the country, conservatives seem to be suffering from the Straussian "White Hat/Black Hat" Syndrome. We're always the good guys, and they're always the bad guys, no matter what. And yet somehow this rather childish notion is strong enough to cause the same knee-jerk reaction among many of the people on this board.

How do you guys fall for such bullshit?

How do you fall for Michael Moore's bullshit???

I guess it's no surprise that you like him.  Even worthless scum like him can attract people.

a cause and effect relationship between US foreign policy and 9/11. All you have to do is read Bin Laden's fatwa to reach that conclusion.

     But the reason you got blasted is bc your post could have been construed as saying "we deserved it" bc of what we had done. That was the way I read your post the first time; the second time I decided it was ambiguous.

      And you are definitely stepping right into it again with
"We're always the good guys, and they're always the bad guys, no matter what. And yet somehow this rather childish notion is strong enough to cause the same knee-jerk reaction among many of the people on this board. "

    I personally am unaware of any foreign policy decision for which the slaughter of 9/11 was an appropriate response.

     If you want to avoid being eaten alive again, perhaps you might clarify your position on this most sensitive of subjects.

Michael Moore is a great film maker. I appreciate his dark sense of humor and his incredibly well done and emotional films.

However, again you're taking leaps PW. This video clip summed up rather well the thinking among leftist activists after 9/11. It doesn't mean that I accept without question what Moore has to say (for instance I disagree with him strongly on the 2nd amendment). However, that was the prevalent view among the left at the time (and still is, as far as I can tell).

How is this view in any way incorrect, PW?

If anyone thinks that I said "we deserved it", then they're taking emotional leaps that just aren't there.

But even Pat Buchanan is of the same thinking as I on this. There are consequences to Empire, and one of those consequences is that people will resist it, sometimes violently. If you don't want to pay that price, then abandon the Empire.

drool all over me? I'll pass.

I'll tell you what. If you really wanna have a good ole fashioned ass whuppin' contest, fine, I'm game. Two conditions. You come to D.C., and put duct tape over your mouth so I don't have to wipe the saliva off my shoes.

film maker.  George Lucas is a great film maker.

Michael Moore is a worthless piece of shit.

...and is the primary cause of hemroids in the United States.

Moving on. What part of the sentiment is incorrect PW?

and tries to make a buck off of it by claiming it is a "documentary."

He has no talent.  He's nothing more than a fat slob and a huge fraud.



-- Modified on 9/13/2010 3:35:42 PM

or is this start of a beautiful "bromance" ?!----------God-----thought makes me sick------ I was gonna take hiatus for several days-----still may do that. Still, with Eeyorre's "priceless" thread, couldn't resist.

Btw, "genius", it's spelled "love".

liorr called out WW and WW accepted. Forget NYC or DC, they should do it Las Vegas. It's been a few years since I stayed at Mandalay Bay, but they used to have a small boxing ring in their gym. Just have them put 12 ounce gloves on and headgear so there won't be any permanent damage.

GaG would love to promote and handle the action. Shit, we could even get a local Provider that walks around the ring holding a sign with the round number. Of course, just give one card for Round 1, because I doubt we will even need Round 2.

there's a brewing board "bromance" going on here.
"Eeyorre" is gonna pick up WW's plane ticket & they're gonna take an extended "vacation" at Fire Island.

Which would certainly be a break for this board---------

-- Modified on 9/13/2010 4:44:43 PM

At a party in New York in the 1970s, the macho writer Norman Mailer and the flaming homosexual writer Gore Vidal – who hated each year – got into an argument. Mailer threw his drink in Vidal’s face and then punched him in the mouth.

    But Vidal got in the blow that would have decked any writer. In an interview with Time, he described the punch by Mailer and then famously said “Once again words failed him.”

    So, tempting as it may be to put on the gloves, I think on this Board we have to settle differences at the keyboard. But I am thinking of asking TER to create a Screamer’s Board where Liorr, Willy and the other screamers can all scream at each other until they get it out of their system without bothering everyone else.

Who knows, maybe these clowns will accept the challenge sight unseen. Trust me, you'd be in Vegas faster than GaG saying, "Let's Get Ready to Rumble". And what venue is better than Vegas? Just make a P&R Meet and Greet w/a main event.

Now why would I know about a Gore Vidal/Norman Mailer argument? I even went to YouTube to see if by chance it was there. All I got was an old Dick Caveat show with the two of them. Hey, I would've decked Mailer too, just because I think he is an asshole.

they'd both probably faint upon entering the ring.

Btw, Gore Vidal was famous for getting into arguments--he had a famous feud with Wm F Buckley.

fight and the genesis of Mailers real hate toward Vidal.

    Did you watch it to the end? Dick Cavett got in the best line on Mailer -"Stick it where the sun don't shine."

     Hard to believe that one got by the censors in those days.

& you thought P & R board was bad ?!

If Moore "takes any tragedy" and "tries to make a buck off of it" equates him as being "nothing more than a fat slob and a huge fraud", then by logical extension PW, you have to admit that ANY NEWS REPORTING AT ALL is just as much a huge fraud. After all, they generally report tragedies, and they make a buck off it.

But, of course, you again didn't answer my question. What part of that sentiment, expressed by the left (& Moore) as causes of 9/11, is incorrect?

Most of the conservatives here seem to prefer talking about me then refuting my arguments. They do this because name calling is all the grey matter they can muster.

Pretty expensive way to to seek humor, but it would good for a laugh. May as well see of few ladies while I'm there!

...as I recall, GaG still wants to beat me up.

...Vegas is the home of the UFC, isn't it? Why not settle it in an octagon?

they say that poor US foreign policy was reason enough for the radical Islamic terrorists to cowardly hijack commercial airliners and crash them into major buildings causing thousands of deaths???

You don't think that logic is incorrect?????

Sure, they may have been pissed off at US foreign policy but this type of retribution is not payback, it is savage murder.

One more comment about your "brilliant" friend Michael Moore.  He recently has been quoted as saying -- and I paraphrase -- that he doesn't feel the Mosque should be built two blocks away from Ground Zero.  He believes it should be built ON Ground Zero.  His justification?  There is a McDonald's within two blocks of Ground Zero and McDonald's food has killed more people than the terrorists have.

And you still think this piece of shit is "brilliant" ????

I am not arguing the point that fast food can be unhealthy.  But to equate the consumption of fast food -- an act which is done by choice -- with the premeditated and cowardly acts of terrorism that killed thousands of people and destroyed equally as many families is utterly ridiculous.

This arrogant dick may be the only person on earth who actually tries to stir up more shit than you do.

But blowback is blowback. It's not just. It's not right. But do you really think it wouldn't have happened if the US wasn't busy making a lot more than 3000 people in the Middle East dead?

I disagree with Moore that there should be a Mosque on Ground Zero. There shouldn't be any Mosques at all anywhere in the world, nor should there be any churches or synogagues.

But, hell yeh, he has a point about McD's. Quite frankly, I think the biggest mistake the terrorists made was not to incorporate and figure out a way to make a profit off of murdering 3000 people. Had they done that, all of Wall Street would have called them financial geniuses and turned them into idols of hero worship.

If you think fast food consumption is done by choice, then you're really not up to date on the science. Turns out, much of the crap that's sold as food in this country is just as addicting as many drugs are. If you think this is an accident, then you're pretty fucking gullible.

on another fucking tangent and threw out a bunch of nonsense about incorporating their terrorism.

So, with that nonsense, I need to get off this thread.

Oh, and call me gullible, but I have never been forced to go to McDonald's or any other fast food restaurant.

I'm sure our foreign policy did if fact have something to do with 9/11. To deny otherwise would be childish or immature. That is not to say our foreign policy has been all wrong for 20 or even 40 years. Every country has a foreign policy and it is to promote, protect and forward the country.

Jerry Falwell, Michael Moore and leftist activists are not really what I call authorities on U.S. foreign policies. Falwell is very knowledgeable on prying donation for himself from a crackpot religious segment, Michael Moore is a movie producer who exploits ignorance and the leftist activists along with the righty radicals push an extreme agenda for god knows what reason. But I'm sure you know all that.

So I went down to the trailer park to discuss this with some conservatives. Nice park by the way, right in the center of Scottsdale, close to good cafes and downtown shopping. And only cost $850 a month + utilities and cable to park your million dollar motor home here for the winter. I mention this just so you know I talked to bona fide  conservatives not some jackass want-a- b. Most were of the opinion "Our foreign policy didn't use enough cruse missiles in the past." On my drive back to Tempe and my $35,000 travel trailer and $300 a month trailer park, cable included  I decided they had a point.
 
I don't really know about "How do you guys fall for such bullshit?" How do you keep shoveling  this bullshit up?" Speaking of shoveling, this winter Dec., Jan, Feb. I'll be shoveling sun shine and swimming in the heated pool here at the park. Surprised they didn't have one in Scottsdale. Oh well, hard times has fallen on everyone.

...because it's true. There isn't a thing so vile in this world that a capitalist wouldn't be willing to make a buck off of. If you think mass murder of thousands of people is enough to sway them, then you're still pretty fucking gullible.

I've often pondered if the companies that produce nuclear weapons ever had any cognitive dissonance about what business they're in. What's that old adage? Capitalists will sell you the rope to hang them with?

If the knee-jerk conservatives here have so little control over themselves that they can't help but to call me names, then I hardly see why I should be blamed for it.

From my point of view, there isn't much that GaG, Phil, or PW can say that isn't provocative, and yet I manage to retain myself from name calling. I don't see why they can't do the same.

Oh, the curse of high expectations.

They would stand in the middle of the ring and shout at one another. WW would win if Liorr resorted to his fucking Yankees or Jets and Liorr would win when Capitalist lacky was hurreled across the ring. You would need about 3 rounds.

With the right provider in the right outfit you might get 7 or eight rounds because they would be staring at her.

would be his ability with english language. When he wanted to he could argue with a command of the language most people couldn't understand. You would have to get a dictanary out after the debate and look up the meaning of the words he used to see how you did against him.

Your pretty good a phrasing inflamble statements to provoke the name calling and I suspect you like it that way.

i'm going to be on the ticket also. with a couple of my tiger claws up your ass i may not even need the fellows to help. see you soon. MUAAAH!!!

There are limits to the kind of kink I'm into Mein. I'm not sure I could get my pistol up if the bed is covered in all that drool.