I noticed how you skipped over the fact that police body cams are NOT good for "everyone" even though you claimed that they were..

You were wrong and you just can't admit it..

Michale

Funny how you totally ignore the facts and try to make everything about me..

What thought process, besides ignorance, allows such behavior??

Like I said.. Too easy... :D

Michale

Funny how on most issues you never seem to convince anyone and yet you claim to dominate.

What thought process allows such behavior?

Really???

CopCams benefit EVERYONE???

You DO realize that, once a video is taken, it becomes PUBLIC record and ANYONE can ask and receive ANY video footage??

So, if you get arrested and there is video footage of that arrest, I can get that footage and see you in all your glory..

I know, I know.. No biggie...

Suppose some sick pervert who get's off on seeing rape victims decides he want's to build a library of rape victim interviews...

You really need to THINK before you strike, Al..

You make things WAY too easy...

Michale

Then you definitely missed out..

The last 5 minutes were BRUTAL....

I guarantee you that, if you watched it, you would not sleep good for a week...

Michale

Yer kidding, right??

So, what you are saying is that, once Congress ratifies a treaty, that treaty is in effect in perpetuity.. That it could NEVER be rescinded or changed or altered in ANY way..

Is THAT the load of bovine feces you are trying to shovel???

Get over it, Al.. The First Iraq War was a bi-partisan war that was fully legal and fully authorized in a bi-partisan manner by the United States Congress..

I get it.. You are one of those Blame America First And Always type activists..

But that's not going to fly around here.. Not while *I* am around, at any rate.. :D

You are WAY outclassed here, son... :D

Michale

Yea, you keep saying that..

Yet it's as much bullshit now as the first time you said it..

PROVE it..

The US remains bound by the Geneva Conventions.

So???

My previous comments on BLM answer your delusional rants... no need to retype them.

Your only comments on BLM is that it is not a racist hate group.. I have already PROVEN that false...

You have absolutely NO FACTS to support your bullshit claim...

I wouldn't assume that a failure to respond means anything more or less than not being taken seriously.

Yea, I know you ASSUME that... You know what happens when you make an assumption??

You make an ASS out of YOU and UMPTION...

Silence gives assent, son.. :D

But, thanks for playing... You are WAY out of your league here..

Michale

I wouldn't assume that a failure to respond means anything more or less than not being taken seriously.
You should definitely keep assuming that though.

So, apparently your reading comprehension, or lack thereof, is intentional.

That's not a straightforward approach to debate or life. Some would call it dishonest.

I see you are attempting the "conspiracy theorist" attack once again... also pathetic.

But, no.
An illegal war of aggression remains an illegal war of aggression despite a declaration of war by Congress.
The US remains bound by the Geneva Conventions.
I'm not surprised you believe US law is supreme, since you dive into the shallow end of that pool regularly.

My previous comments on BLM answer your delusional rants... no need to retype them.
There's a little arrow to scroll up if your memory is failing too.

Why should I care what other countries compile?? What relevance does it have??

Still waiting for you to address these questions...

Do you believe that the Holocaust happened??

Do you believe that the US or Israel had anything to do with the 9/11 attacks??

Do you believe that astronauts from the US actually walked on the moon??

Do you know how I know that I am dead on ballz accurate about the BLM being a racist hate group??

Because not a SINGLE Weigantian has ever questioned it..

As has adequately been proven, if I am off the reservation on statements, I am called on it.. Usually by more than one Weigantian...

The simple fact that no one here questions the facts or the conclusions is nearly proof-positive of the accuracy...

Michale

That's actually funny, because it's the BLM racist hate group that is sticking their heads in the sand, as you are..

Let me lay some numbers on you...

Say 10,000 black people are killed by homicide in a year... The number is actually closer to 8000-9000 but let's go with 10,000...

Of those 10,000 black people killed by homicide every year, EIGHTY are killed by cops..

FRAKIN' EIGHTY!!!! POINT ZERO EIGHT PERCENT..

Now, out of those 10,000 black people killed by homicide every year, NINE THOUSAND SIX HUNDRED are killed by other black people..

NINE THOUSAND SIX HUNDRED

And the BLM racist hate group IGNORES the 9,600 and goes with the 80...

And you accuse *ME* of "sticking my head in the sand"?? I have never asked this of any Weigantian, but I am forced to ask this now..

Are you frakin' INSANE!!!?????

On WHAT planet in WHAT universe is it logical and rational to IGNORE almost 10,000 deaths and concentrate on 80 deaths??

These death stats don't even account for all the black abortions done in the US, upwards of 70% when accounting for racial density.. In Mississippi, black people make up only 34% of the population, yet they account for 64% of the abortions...

If black lives TRULY mattered to the racist morons of the BLM, then the black on black homicide rate and the rate of black babies aborted would be THE only discussion to have...

But you can't attack white people over THOSE factors, so the racist hate group ignores them...

These are the facts that you continue to ignore...

Michale

As far as getting to decide, I don't have to... Many MANY in the black community have already decided what BLM is all about..

They are a detriment to the black community and are actually PART of the problem, not part of the solution...

Michale

Michale

IF BLM was a legitimate activist group, then it's focus would be on the de-valuation of black lives... IE "Black Lives MATTER"....

If this were the case, blacks being killed by cops is way way way WAY WAY WAY down on the priority list... less than 1% way down on the priority list..

Black on black violence is THE number one killer of blacks age 15 to 34... Black abortions are in the tens, if not hundreds of thousands.....

By comparison, cops killing blacks (which has gone DOWN 75% in the last 10 years) is non-existent...

The simple fact that the BLM group concentrates on this obscure and meaningless stat PROVES that it is a racist hate group...

Class dismissed...

Michale

Which one?? The original or the prequel??

But it really wasn't THAT scary... BWP was much worse..

The Brood (that one's a bit obscure)

The only really scary part of BROOD was when that guy walked out his front door and was grabbed from the side by a friend.. Other than that, it was pretty lame.. : D

Michale

Uhh.. Yes it is... Congress has the power to declare war..

War was declared...

Still waiting for that link to the lists of state sponsors of terrorism that other countries compile.

Still waiting for you to define terrorism and point to terrorist acts committed by the US, Israel and Saudi Arabia governments..

You don't get to decide what BLM is about.

Of course, I "get" what BLM is about. It's a racist hate group, no different than the Democrat Party's KKK..

These are the facts... And the only ones who dispute the facts are BLM racists themselves and you..

BLM is not just about cops killing black people.
In fact, their proposals would increase the professionalism of law enforcement to the benefit of everyone.

So, it IS just about cops...

Why doesn't BLM address the black on black homicides which is THE number one killer of black people??

Answer. Because BLM is a racist hate group..

Michale

Sorry I missed your comment earlier.

You asked a tough question.
Because it really only applies to the first time you see a horror movie.

So, thinking back, here's my top five that got me good... scariest first

The Thing
Jaws
Re-animator
The Brood (that one's a bit obscure)
Rabid (a Canadian film eh)

The classics (by that I mean the old ones not cult classics) never got my blood pumping.
The Shining, The Exorcist, The Omen, Halloween, Nightmare on Elm Street and a few others could have made the list, but the top five just lingered longer... days, weeks, months... I still can't swim in the ocean at night without thinking of Jaws, so it could be number one, but it was also more predictable than The Thing.

Your reading comprehension really is awful.
Go back and examine comment 270.
Or is it intentional?

Votes by Congress do not override treaties we have ratified... so a war of aggression is not legal due to authorization by Congress. Very sloppy Micha.

The "faulty intelligence" claim is just pathetic since the "intelligence" was produced by the war criminals who ignored the actual intelligence created by intelligence professionals... you know, the people the war criminals and you are using as scapegoats.
And, you really don't see the parallel with cops investigating (and clearing) guilty cops?

Still waiting for that link to the lists of state sponsors of terrorism that other countries compile.

You don't get to decide what BLM is about.
Get over that reality.
Your opinion of what it should be about is meaningless.
And, as you seem incapable of retaining this fact, I will repeat it once again... BLM is not just about cops killing black people.
In fact, their proposals would increase the professionalism of law enforcement to the benefit of everyone.
But that requires acknowledging there's a problem, and you would rather stick your head in the sand... or rather, attack people trying to address the problem...

... and why is that again?

The No. 1 preventable cause of death of young black males is homicide -- usually at the hands of other blacks. The primary cause of preventable death among young white males is auto accidents.
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2015/09/10/black_lives_matter_getting_blacks_killed_128039.html

The facts are mounting....

Michale

What IS it about the Demcorat Party that they ALWAYS do the EXACT OPPOSITE of what the American people want??

Michale

Read 'em and weep, sonny... :D

Michale

Not "beliefs", son... FACTS.

Do you know the NUMBER 1 killer of black people between the ages of 15 and 34??

Black people...

When accounting for population density, upwards of 70% of abortions are of black babies...

A black man, Sam Duboes, a scumbag who tried to kill a cop in Cincinnati and got shot in the head for his troubles, left behind 34 kids by 14 different women...

Apparently, black lives don't matter a crap to the racist hate group BLM... They only want to attack white people...

The very definition of a racist hate group, no different than the Democrat Party's KKK....

"These are the facts.... And they are undisputed."
-Kevin Bacon, A FEW GOOD MEN

Michale

I would LOVE to see the legal justification for this hysterical piece of BS spewage...

Jeeze, look who I am asking for substantiation.. :^/

Michale

Actually, that is the accepted definition of counter-terrorism professionals the world over..

But, of course, you can't be expected to know that.... :D

I noticed that YOUR definition is absent.. Why is that?? Cowardice?? ;D

Afraid to go on the record because you know how wrong you are??

What was I thinking?

You actually THINK??

Who knew.... :D

Michale

Wrong... Wrong... Irrelevant...

The war in Iraq was duly authorised by Congress... Ergo, it was not illegal..

The legal justification (there, you said it yourself.. LEGAL) for it was mistaken intel... 3 BiPartisan Commissions (2 in the US, one in the UK) determined that there was no intentional lies, just faulty intelligence.. Being wrong does not a lie make. I mean, it's not as if Bush said, "If you like your health plan, you can KEEP your health plan" knowing full well that this was not true... THAT was a lie..

War is terrorising?? Ya don't say?? Of course it is. Once again, you say that because you read it some where.. I KNOW it because I have been there and done that..

But how is that common knowledge relevant to the issue of terrorism??

Hurricane Katrina was none of those things.

Hurricane Katrina wasn't terrorizing?? Ahhh the ignorance... :D

Did I miss anything?
Because I promise to prioritize you needs just as... oh... never mind.

Yea.. you missed EVERYTHING...

Define terrorism...

Name ONE terrorist act committed by the government of the US..

Name ONE terrorist act committed by the government of Israel..

Name ONE terrorist act committed by the government of Saudi Arabia...

Or, you can do what is par for your course and do a Brave Sir Robin impression... :D

Yer dismissed.. :D

Michale

And I'll say this. I don't comment here because of Michale and his innane ravings and his blatant trolling of people who disagree with his poorly sourced arguments.

I'll just say this. The reason "liberals" are more offended by gays being denied rights in the US than they are gays being executed in Iran is because they live in the US, and they have the ability to actually affect US policy. Beyond that, the US is supposed to be better than that; we hold ourselves up to a higher moral code.

There was nothing that could be done in these negotiations about their religious fundamentalism.

After reading all of these comments, you never gave a solid response for what you think SHOULD be done. All I saw was a single negative response about not legitimizing Iran.

That's not a policy.

I'll not be commenting again, but Chris, if you read these, Michale is toxic and drives off many people who might otherwise become active on this site.

Unfortunately, I've seen a few others that rank up there in the lame category.

A

I just knew you would like it here. :)

But, you're wrong about The Blair Witch Project ... that was THE lamest "horror" movie ever. Of course, it didn't pass my 15-minute test so I didn't see most of it.

Just finished up the things that needed doing and I am now ready to prioritize your needs.

Well, you may have noticed, I prioritized a response to Liz first.

But don't read that the wrong way.
I just like her better.
It's nothing business, it's just personal.

Wait.
Hold on.
I have a little piece of lint on my shirt.
Got it.
So now I am ready to prioritize your needs.

Where to begin.
I guess you're retired and have all day to spend here, so I understand how somebody checking in during a short break after lunch may lead you to jump to another wrong conclusion.
I hope your victory parade was loads of fun.
Send me some pictures.

OK.
Since you just went ahead and created a straw man to argue with, and since definitions aren't exactly one of your strong points, and since you generally just ignore what I say anyway, I'll just touch base on the "terrorism" thing.

The war in Iraq was an illegal war of aggression.
The legal justifications for it were fabricated lies, thus the war qualifies as a war crime.
A war crime that terrorized millions.

Hurricane Katrina was none of those things.

The Blair Witch Project was one of the lamest "horror" movies ever, and you are the first "scared the hell out of" person I've come across.
But your point still doesn't make any sense.

Your "interpretation" of the definition of terror you helpfully provided that exempts our actions and those of our allies is amusing.
Very clever.

"How's that working out for you... being clever?"- Fight Club

And very original too.
Oh so very original.

You think our war in Iraq was unintentional?
You think the lies were fabricated unintentionally?
You think our war in Iraq was apolitical?
You think the war in Iraq was free of ideological influence?
You think Iraqis victimized by an illegal war of aggression are combatants that can be legally targeted?

Very, very, very, very, very unconvincing.
Ditto Israel.
Ditto Saudi Arabia.
Ditto our regime change effort in Syria using proxies on our own list of terror organizations.

Just out of curiosity, do you know where to look up the lists of terror orgs that other countries compile?
Or is there only one?

Moving on.
I am oh so pleased that you found a voice in the echo chamber to validate your BLM beliefs.
I am flabbergasted that someone at such a respected liberal media outlet like the WSJ would independently reach the same conclusions as you... oh, wait.
I actually mean miss the point just like you.
What was I thinking?

You may want to deny that how law enforcement treats the black community isn't a problem.
Not sure why you want to deny it.
But you do.
I've read more than enough reports, seen more than enough video, and noticed more large financial settlements getting paid out by taxpayers as compensation for unjustified police violence than I want.
It is a problem.

The fact that other problems also exist doesn't change that reality.

Did I miss anything?
Because I promise to prioritize you needs just as... oh... never mind.

Now, I know you're just trying to push my buttons. :)

Yeah, my wording conveyed an association that unintentionally ruffled your feathers...

I am sure that you independently came up with the non-attack use of "apologist" and that its' frequent usage by others did not have any effect on your language whatsoever.

I don't think that sounds sincere, or that it will smooth your feathers. So, what can I say?

I think very highly of you.
A little incident of infiltration via osmosis doesn't change that.

There is a saying... some may even call it a rule-

Only a fool would fail to adopt a good idea simply because it was not their own.

OK, let's take what you have already said and examine what your possible definition of terrorism could be..

First, let me give you the definition of terrorism as defined by operators in the field..

"Terrorism is defined as ongoing and systematic attacks of violence specifically targeted against innocent civilian/non-combatant persons or property for the purpose of furthering a political, economical or ideological agenda."

Note that the definition is completely objective and doesn't get into semantics and subjective terminology like "illegal", "unlawful" and other such subjective terminology. It also doesn't rely on emotionalism like "horrible" and "terrifying" etc etc...

Also, keep in mind that, while INTENT plays a big part in what is and is not terrorism, there are other factors as well..

Using this definition, an argument can be made that the 9/11 attacks on the Pentagon was not an act of terrorism because the target was a legitimate military target.. However, in this case, the choice of delivery indicates that it was a terrorist act.. If a terrorist had flown a plane into the pentagon where he was the only one in the plane, that would have clearly been a legitimate attack against a legitimate military target...

Another prime example of mis-labeling of terrorism was the Fort Hood shooting.. Being that the target was soldiers, it was clearly not a terrorist attack...

Now, the only example you gave of YOUR definition of terrorism was the Second Gulf War... Your phrasing would indicate that, because Iraqis were terrorized, THAT made it terrorism..

So, in your definition, all that is needed is that someone is terrorized...

So, by YOUR (apparent) definition, Hurricane Katrina was an act of terrorism, because certainly the people of the Gulf Coast were scared shitless...

Taking your (apparent) definition a step further, anyone who wants or intends to terrify people is a terrorist..

So that means all the actors and producers and directors of BLAIR WITCH PROJECT are, obviously, terrorists because that movie scared the hell out of a lot of people. Myself included..

And, since the INTENT was to terrorize, then that means all the people associated with the movie were terrorists..

Of course, in real life, Desert Storm II was not a terrorist attack but a legitimate military operation.. The advisability of the war is debatable to be sure...

But terrorism??

Not even close..

Let's turn to Israel..

Another common mis-labeling of a terrorist attack is the King David Hotel attack of 1946. Israel Bashers just *LOVE* to throw this one out as proof positive that Israel was borne of terrorism..

Of course, the facts say different...The Irgun tried everything possible to minimize innocent casualties...

But the main reason that the KDH was not a terrorist attack is because, at the time, it was the British Regional Military Headquarters...

That made ANY attack on the KDH a legitimate attack because an enemy HQ is a legitimate military target...

I could go on and on about this subject (and often do!! :D) because I lived, slept, ate, drank and breathed CT for over 2 decades...

You want to go shot for shot on what is and is not terrorism, I will be HAPPY to oblige you... But you'll find that, if you come armed with hysterical emotionalism rather than cold hard objective facts, you will lose... Every time...

Class dismissed...

Professor Michale

Exclusive: Russian troops join combat in Syria - sources
http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/09/09/us-mideast-crisis-syria-exclusive-idUSKCN0R91H720150909

The Obama's "reset" with Russia is complete....

Completely DOA....

Michale

I almost feel sorry for Al... :D

Michale

No worries on my end, if you can recognize that I wasn't holding you responsible for doing their bidding. Like I admitted, none of us are free from their influence...

So, in other words, though I am doing their bidding, I am not responsible for it because, like everyone else, I am not free from their influence??

Is that what you're saying about my take on what we are discussing here? Please, say it ain't so, otherwise my feathers will be very seriously ruffled! :)

:D

Michale

I make the claim that Iran is THE Number 1 State Sponsor of Terrorism and I back it up with US State Department and Wikipedia Links..

I make the claim that Syria is THE Number 2 State Sponsor of Terrorism and I back it up with US State Department and Wikipedia Links..

You make the claim that the US and Israel are state sponsors of terrorism.

NO SUBSTANTIATION whatsoever..

I ask you to define what terrorism is...

NO RESPONSE whatsoever..

So, the ONLY logical conclusion is that you are talking out your ass....

"I don't understand your hostility. I merely point out that the facts show you to be a liar."
-Commander Spock, STAR TREK, The Alternative Factor...

Michale

But if you have a habit of starting a debate and then bailing when the facts are obvious, then the conclusion is painfully obvious.. :D

If you could take the time to throw out red herrings, you could take the time to post what you THINK terrorism is.

The fact that you don't simply proves my conclusion is accurate....

Michale

If I'm busy answering Liz and walking my dog, you really shouldn't jump to the false conclusion that I am conceding.

I'm about to go do some other things too, so go ahead and plan your victory parade, just know that I think, and I would guess most everybody else would agree, that you are operating in an alternate universe that doesn't quite match our reality.

That's like putting Dr MLK into Ted Bundy's shoes...

It's completely and utterly ridiculous...

Until you can come up with a SINGLE instance of US State Sanctioned terrorism and how you DEFINE terrorism, your arguments are completely and utterly without merit...

"These are the facts.. And they are undisputed..."
-Captain 'Smilin' Jack Ross, A FEW GOOD MEN

Michale

Just saw your follow-up

I think I addressed most of it in my previous comment... but here's a bit more.

I don't feel that you attacked me.
They did.
No worries on my end, if you can recognize that I wasn't holding you responsible for doing their bidding. Like I admitted, none of us are free from their influence. In other words, I'm not attacking you either.
Conventional wisdom permeates every aspect of our lives... and even I can't be perpetually skeptical and cynical...

... yes, I'm making fun of myself but I'm also being serious.

But to clarify my previous post, it's not a coincidence that the Five Eyes NSA program exists. It's not a coincidence that the Global Community is heavily skewed to the same ideology espoused by this conventional wisdom... yes, even Canada, which you seem to be well aware of going by your back and forth with Michale.

I am not blind that other governments in the world do horrible things sometimes.

I am not disagreeing that "it is entirely possible to be critical of US foreign policy while at the same time understanding what the international community must do to reign in bad behavior by many of the regional players in the Middle East"

But, the context of the CIA coup in Iran, the false accusation against Assad in the Hariri case, the general double standards about nuclear weapons, chemical weapons, wars of aggression, support for oppressive dictators and monarchs and proxies...

... that context deserves a seat at the table in all discussions about the regional players in the ME.

It's just putting ourselves into their shoes.

So yes, we should criticize and reign in bad behavior. In Iran, in Syria, and in Libya... but also in Saudi Arabia, in Israel, in Egypt and of course our own.

And if our own bad behavior doesn't merit a death sentence, and the bad behavior of our "allies" doesn't merit a death sentence, then we should reconsider if Syria, Iraq, Iran and Libya merit or merited a death sentence.
Because we've been pretty quick to reach those death sentence verdicts, and again, in context, the evidence hasn't been very convincing... and that's quite an understatement in some cases.

Hay now! That's MY argument!!! :D

"I'm fatter....er.. flattered..."
-Eddie Murphy, THE NUTTY PROFESSOR

:D

Michale

That helps me understand where you are coming from. Thanks.

In future, if I happen to use one of your code words (such as apologist), know that it is not coming from any sort of ideological bent because I don't have one. My analysis is based solely on what makes sense to me after gathering as much info as I can from all sides of an issue.

You bring up the BLM, argue it's not a racist hate group, which it clearly is.. I give you the FACTS that prove that and then you go silent on the issue..

‘Black Lives Matter’—but Reality, Not So Much
The movement was founded on a falsehood. Scapegoating the police ignores the true threats to the urban poor.
http://www.wsj.com/articles/black-lives-matterbut-reality-not-so-much-1441755075

Then you try to take me on on the terrorism issue, on how the US and Israel are terrorist nations and when you are called on it and asked to define terrorism, you bail once again...

Don't get me wrong. A concession is a concession whether it is verbalized or not...

I just would have thought someone who appears to be so sure of themselves would man up and concede the point, rather than just slink away and do the blogosphere equivalent of sticking one's fingers in their ears and saying, "Nyaaa Nyaaaa I'm ignoring you!!"

'S ok, though.. I am used to it.. As I said, a concession is a concession either by commission or omission... :D

Peace Out.. :D

Michale

Neoliberals aren't liberals.
Neocons aren't conservative.

The neolibcons... the Wall Street coddling warmongers in both parties who pursue the same foreign policies and economic policies... do not want the current status quo challenged.

They put on a good show about quibbling along the margins to make it appear that voters have a choice.

But when Tea Partiers protested against the possible war in Syria and when Occupy protested against Wall Street, the neolibcons came together and both efforts were crushed.

The neolibcons trot out the "apologist" attack (among other attacks) against anybody that points out that we and/or our "allies" are just as bad if not worse than our "enemies".

It is reinforced by the establishment in both parties, and by the corporate media that does their bidding. It is reinforced by the curriculum in our schools, using books that go through THEIR approval process.

Look at what The Stig wrote about in his comments on the vote counts for the Iran deal.
A perfect example on display.

It's not a vast secret conspiracy, it's done openly with "conventional wisdom" leading the way. It's an ideology shared by most of those with power and those in powerful positions.

And CW explained very well on the "About Chris" page why he didn't want to call this website conventional wisdom.

It isn't serving us well.

Just for the record and to be clear that I was not attacking nor accusing you of anything, here is what I asked of you:

"Why is it that you seem to be acting as apologist for both the Iranian and Assad regimes? I find the direction you seem to be taking to be more than a little disturbing in its dismissiveness towards the nefarious actions of these two regimes.

To which you replied,

"Good to see you using the neolibcon standard attack for whenever their twisted worldview gets challenged. I am not an apologist, I am a realist.

To reiterate, I am not here to verbally attack anyone and I have never done so, not once in the many years I have been involved in making political comments on the internet(s).

So, rather than accuse me of attacking you, why don't you try to help me understand where you are coming from as you dismiss the nefarious behavior demonstrated by the Iranian and Syrian regimes.

Let me say again, it is entirely possible to be critical of US foreign policy while at the same time understanding what the international community must do to reign in bad behavior by many of the regional players in the Middle East.

If we are not starting from that position, then it's going to be extremely difficult and frustrating for us to have an intelligent and enlightening discussion about any of these issues. And, that would be unfortunate, because I really welcome your presence here.

No one is claiming that the US is perfect...

But we are not a terrorist state..

Iran is the Number 1 Terrorist state on the planet...

Syria is the Number 2 Terrorist state on the planet...

This is the fact you always overlook....

Michale

It jumps out at you, and you reflexively attack using their carefully crafted tactic... because you think I'm challenging you when I'm actually challenging them.

You've lost me.

So, there is a VAST world-wide conspiracy, eh?? :D

I think someone has been watching too many James Bond movies.. :D

Michale

Do you believe that the Holocaust happened??

Do you believe that the US or Israel had anything to do with the 9/11 attacks??

Do you believe that astronauts from the US actually walked on the moon??

I am just trying to see where you are coming from??

Michale

Per comment 228

Good to see you using the neolibcon standard attack for whenever their twisted worldview gets challenged.

I am not an apologist, I am a realist.

Nefarious actions?
Are you referring to exercising rights guaranteed by treaty? Or, defending your country against al Qaida? I can see how these radically nefarious actions might be upsetting.

Illegal aggression?
Torture?
Neither comes close to our actions.
I know you've seen the pictures and video.

Neolibcon propaganda paints their demons quite effectively, but their pattern of lies and deception has by now been exposed often enough that those who fail to challenge their claims come across as naïve.

I know it's difficult to believe that the coordinated effort to misinform could possibly deceive educated, reasonable people such as ourselves. But how many times do we need to reach into the fire before we learn we will get burned?

Millions have died and tens of millions more are suffering because of the neolibcon policies to remake the world... and they don't care one bit. They don't accept responsibility. It doesn't slow down their efforts. They violate the principles our country was founded upon and the religious teachings the majority in this country claim to value... not to mention logic, reason and common sense. A pattern of failure is brushed under the rug.

Obama has bombed seven different countries and used that "record" to defend diplomacy with Iran... who gave up a lot to get that pointy stick removed from their eye.

They've got the right screaming about Obama while the left screams about Bush, and yet we keep getting the same ol same ol.

Even though he says it's for all the wrong reasons, I'm getting praise from a right wing Trumpeteer for challenging the status quo Wall Street Liberal Warmongering "Left".

That's how rare it is.
The "other side" recognizes it too.

It jumps out at you, and you reflexively attack using their carefully crafted tactic... because you think I'm challenging you when I'm actually challenging them.

All of us have been spun by their spinners more than once. Yes, including me.

This isn't about who you are, or who Michale is.
You'd still be you if you got yourself a little more unspun.

I also know that the Iranians and Syrians aren't angels.
They've sinned.
But we are living in a glass house, and our "leaders" have a stone throwing addiction.

Michale

At least, not in the sense that you imply...

Michale

There has been no Israeli or Saudi terrorism.. Not now, not ever...

Michale

Amen to frakin' that!!!

Michale

Jeezus, Al..

Do you belong to the TERRORIST/SCUMBAG FANBOI CLUB???

You seem to go out of your way to defend the scum of the universe...

Michale

Actually ... well, let's save that discussion for another day. :)

As always... I look forward to it... :D

Michale

Our illegal war of aggression in Iraq certainly terrorized millions. (Bush)

BZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ

Wrong...

But, before I lay into you and tell you how wrong you are, we have to settle a point..

What is your definition of terrorism..

Michale

And Katrina was just a spring shower... :^/

Actually ... well, let's save that discussion for another day. :)

I think it is possible to be very critical of the Bush and Obama administrations vis-à-vis their Middle East strategies and policies and still be equally critical of repressive regimes in Libya, Syria, Iran and beyond.

I mean, it's not an either/or proposition ...

The evidence against Assad was about as convincing as the lies the Bushies used to start their illegal war in Iraq.

You have made similar comments about the innocence of Iran with respect to its strictly "nuclear energy" program and that sanctions currently against Iran are essentially unjust.

Why is it that you seem to be acting as apologist for both the Iranian and Assad regimes? I find the direction you seem to be taking to be more than a little disturbing in its dismissiveness towards the nefarious actions of these two regimes.

Um, not sure I agree about Libya.

Really? I'm guessing you have forgotten then, about Gaddafi's bloodcurdling rant warning what he was about to do to his fellow citizens in Benghazi - the televised address that directly led to the humanitarian intervention.

Chemical weapons?
Really.

In case you didn't notice, IS is using them, and the people we are supporting in Syria are the likely culprits of every incidence of their use in Syria.
The evidence against Assad was about as convincing as the lies the Bushies used to start their illegal war in Iraq.

I was referring to the aerial bombings... y'know... like our specialty.

"A terrorist is a terrorist is a terrorist..

No perspective required...."

So, the victims of our, Saudi, or Israeli terrorism fit in where?

Our illegal war of aggression in Iraq certainly terrorized millions. (Bush)

Our indiscriminate drone warfare has certainly terrorized and targeted many innocents. (Bush and Obama)

Our covert regime change effort in Syria using groups actually on our own list of terrorists has certainly terrorized millions. (Obama)

Um, not sure I agree about Libya.

Hard to say for certain, but what Gaddafi would have done probably wouldn't even have ranked with what Sisi has done in Egypt.

And it certainly wouldn't have ranked with what has been happening in Libya since our intervention... and that is even excluding all the casualties from our bombing.

And Katrina was just a spring shower... :^/

Michale

Yea... Chemical weapons.. "Brutal"... :^/

Michale

Which SHOULD have been Clinton's FIRST clue that it was a bad idea... :D

And Democrats want her to be POTUS!!???

Michale

The sales job for the war in Libya was pretty slick, but I hope the results speak for themselves and no future "humanitarian wars" are pursued.

I think there may be times when that is the wrong conclusion to be drawn.

And, if you recall, the primary salesman for the intervention in Libya was none other than Gaddafi, himself.

NOW you have just pushed a button..

THAT is *THE* biggest piles of crap of ALL the piles of crap that exists in the universe..

A terrorist is a terrorist is a terrorist..

No perspective required....

Michale

For example.....?????

So, yes, we agree

Yes.. We agree....

Michale

Per comment 213

Uh, yeah.
But you've been arguing that we are to blame because we didn't effect regime change in Syria using our military.

A rather different cause and effect.
And it's one that ignores what we have been doing.

So, yes, we agree BUT...

Per comment 211

Yeah, I was working on a second comment that included some of that.

As far as Assad goes, given that he was a rendition partner for the US, and that the exodus from Syria didn't start until after foreign militants attacked Syria, I would say that the Saudi and US role and responsibility is greater.

After 9/11, I have trouble blaming him for defending his country from attacks by al Qaida and their ilk, but there's no doubt that some of the tactics he has used to fend off the attackers have been brutal.

I made a vague reference to Israel... what with the one persons terrorist is another persons freedom fighter angle, not to mention the right to self defense on both sides... but I think the Saudis are still tops in both funding and damage caused... assuming US actions don't count.

The sales job for the war in Libya was pretty slick, but I hope the results speak for themselves and no future "humanitarian wars" are pursued.

Iranian support for their ally Syria is not terrorism.

Likewise, if we are going to talk about terror by "proxies" (note the quotes as Hezbollah gets support but doesn't take orders from Iran), then US proxies must be included as well... but then US statistics don't count anything we do as terrorism do they?

Then of course, we would need to discuss that Saudi Arabia funding madrassas that breed militants using government profits funneled through NGOs, and pretending not to notice the outflow of billions and countless citizens to terror groups, and the US not even counting the billions being spent on the regime change effort in Syria are all relevant to the #1 state sponsor of terror claim.

It seems that all of our "allies" are exempt.

But, you know all that too.

Which is what I have been saying..

Glad we agree, Al :D

Michale

Had the international community not acted in Libya, there may very well had been another kind of tragedy. The Libyan leader made no bones about that.

It was very disappointing, however, that, once again, the military option was used without paying equal attention and giving equal resources to the diplomatic and political part that might have made this intervention successful and, perhaps, even a model for similar interventions in a serious effort to give real meaning to the Responsibility to Protect.

Yes, US actions in the Middle East, covert and otherwise, have greatly contributed to what is happening throughout the region.

But, let's not forget the role played by the Assad regime and the Iraqi government, not to mention Saudi Arabia, Israel and the list goes on. These governments are not without the lion's share of responsibility for what is happening in their respective countries and throughout the Middle East and North Africa, as a whole, with respect to mass migrations, in particular, and quality of life, in general.

As for the "civil war" in Syria-

It rarely gets mentioned in the MSM, but the first shots fired in that "civil war" were by foreign militants and their targets were Syrian policemen.

(Michale- "You're into justice, this argument should appeal to you"- Steve Martin in My Blue Heaven)

Also ignored, the $400 million annual budget for the covert CIA regime change effort to topple Assad that joined the ongoing multi-billion dollar Saudi and Gulf state effort which started the "civil war" two years before the Islamic State emerged, and three years before our overt effort to train "moderate" Syrians was publicly acknowledged.

The covert effort includes logistics, funding, and the arming and training of Sunni militants... ALL of whom have either now joined IS or al Qaida, or are fighting alongside them in Syria.

US responsibility for the Syrian refugee problem is far larger than our "leaders" will admit.

Liz- I haven't found any information on any Canadian participation in the regime change effort in Syria, but given that only a third of the refugees entering Europe are Syrian, I think you mentioning Libya is very relevant. Our joint destruction of the formerly richest nation in Africa, and the unleashing of all its' weapons can't be ignored.

Other war of terror efforts in Africa are also responsible for instability and misery contributing to the refugee crisis.

Of particular concern, the report said, was Iran’s continued support of the powerful Hezbollah militia and political party in Lebanon; and its assistance to fighters supporting Syrian President Bashar al-Assad’s regime. Iran also hasn’t identified or initiated judicial proceedings against senior al Qaeda leaders it has in custody.
http://www.wsj.com/articles/u-s-report-finds-35-rise-in-global-terror-attacks-in-2014-1434720328

Hurricane strikes are actually quite rare in this part of FL... Floyd was actually a brush, not a direct strike.. Even though it prompted the largest peace-time evacuation in the history of the US. Took our kids 13 hours to go about 60 miles inland...

Before Floyd, you have to go back to 1964 for a strike.. Hurricane Dora...

Then came the 2005 season and all bets were off.. :D

We haven't had a Cat 3 strike on the CONUS in almost a decade.. I won't even get out of bed for anything less than a Cat 2.. :D

Michale

My position stands. IRAN is the number 1 state sponsor of terrorism..

Don't take my word for it..

US STATE DEPARTMENT
Number 1 State Sponsor of Terrorism IRAN

WIKIPEDIA
Number 1 State Sponsor of Terrorism IRAN

You are entitled to your own opinion...

But you are not entitled to your own facts..

And the fact is, Iran is the Number 1 State Sponsor Of Terrorism..

Michale

With your vast experience, you should certainly know that people with vastly more experience than you have also been proven wrong many times in the not too distant past.

It is knowledge of that reality that makes it impossible for me to accept the position you have put forward...

... not to mention the knowledge that it was Sunni Muslims of various nationalities, not the least of which were Saudis, who have been responsible for the vast majority of the terror incidents attributed to Islamic militants. Not Shiite Iranians.

Currently, our government has the Islamic State listed as the number one threat, with al Qaida as number two... and both are Sunni Muslim groups... not Shiite Iranians.

Another fact, US military statistics from the 2003 war in Iraq show that Saudi Arabia was the leading source of foreign fighters captured or killed in attacks on US forces. Not Iranians.
I don't believe these are classified as terror attacks, but it is still a telling fact that raises doubts about your assertion.

But I know you know these facts, so you must have others in mind in your secret stash of metrics.

We get some pretty good light shows here in sunny southern Ontario but, I think we may have THE least extreme weather patterns on the planet where I am ... situated equidistant between two Great Lakes, Huron and Ontario, which seems to have a moderating effect, most of the time.

http://sjfm.us/temp/GEDC0099.JPG

Although, I love the rain...

It's funny..

Excepting deployments, I was in the Pacific Northwest, which is famous for it's rainy weather, for about a decade... Mostly Salem, OR but also Whidbey Island, WA

But I had NEVER seen such violent storms as I did when we moved to FL... In the west, lightning was something you saw up in the clouds diffused so much all you saw was a fluorescent effect...

I had never seen real lightning until we moved here to St Augustine.. I love the storms.. Had a blast during Hurricane Floyd in 1999, even though our backyard was trashed an a tree took out our pool...

The Hurricane Parties of 2005 were stuff of legends!!! :D

Michale

Can't say that I'm surprised ...

History was never my strong point, even about my own country... :D

But... Speaking of History.. :D

http://www.chrisweigant.com/2015/09/04/ftp360/#comment-63892

:D

Michale

Can't say that I'm surprised ...

It wasn't meant that way...

NO country should be forced to be the World's Welfare Agency...

If Canada wants to help that's great...

But keep in mind that it's the citizens of Canada that will pay the price...

There is absolutely NOTHING morally wrong with a government who takes the needs and safety of their OWN citizens into account...

Michale

Optional ... If that wasn't a virtual slap across the face, I don't know what would be. :(

That alone gives us all the responsibility we need to accommodate as many Syrian refugees as is humanly possible.

Canada doesn't really share any moral responsibility for the Syrian Refugee problem...

While our efforts may not been on the same level as the US, we do share responsibility as Canada's actions in the region have certainly contributed to the growing refugee and migrant crisis we see in the Middle East and Europe today.

Why would you think Canada had a hand in the Syrian Civil War??

Michale