School wins Muslim dress appeal

[The Avon Lady]

So are you accusing someone of insider trading, rigging bids or going to war for profiteering?

This is really unimpressive.

Stock tip: Allied Defense Group (ADG).

[scandium]

Originally Posted by The Avon Lady

So are you accusing someone of insider trading, rigging bids or going to war for profiteering?

This is really unimpressive.

Stock tip: Allied Defense Group (ADG).

I'm suggesting:

a. Bush intended to invade Iraq long before March/03 and with or without any international support.

b. The reasons for the invasion had nothing to do with those given prior to it (WMD) nor after (liberation).

c. Iraq had no connection to 9/11 and was not a central front in the War on Terror until the US turned it into one.

d. That based on the above invading Iraq did nothing to further achieve anything in the War on Terror, but rather it diverted considerable manpower, money, and other resources away from it.

e. That therefore this administration seems to consider the War on Terror to be little more than a sideshow whose aim is only to ensure that American citizens and the Democratic opposition (for whom dissent equates being "soft on terror", and worse) give the government free reign to do as it pleases. To quote Goering, since its as true now as it was then: "The people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same way in any country."

f. Finally we arrive at the real agenda of this administration: war for profit and nothing else. Their speeches, their actions only serve one of two aims: either to keep the people distracted by the sideshow and subservient to their agenda, or to directly further that agenda by pushing through legislation and Executive Orders that keep the profits coming to the right family members, friends, lobbyists, and campaign contributors.

[The Avon Lady]

Originally Posted by scandium

I'm suggesting:

a. Bush intended to invade Iraq long before March/03 and with or without any international support.

No proof. Indeed suggestive is the right word.

b. The reasons for the invasion had nothing to do with those given prior to it (WMD) nor after (liberation).

No proof.

c. Iraq had no connection to 9/11 and was not a central front in the War on Terror until the US turned it into one.

I suggest you start looking up the quotes from people like Clinton (both Mr. & Mrs.), Albright and even Kerry that all publicly announced their assessments that Iraq was an immediate threat to the US and others.

d. That based on the above invading Iraq did nothing to further achieve anything in the War on Terror, but rather it diverted considerable manpower, money, and other resources away from it.

There is a separate argument here as to the strategy employed but military blunders aren't usually anything but just that.

e. That therefore this administration seems to consider the War on Terror to be little more than a sideshow whose aim is only to ensure that American citizens and the Democratic opposition (for whom dissent equates being "soft on terror", and worse) give the government free reign to do as it pleases. To quote Goering, since its as true now as it was then: "The people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same way in any country."

Yada! Yada! Now the old Goering quote. Bu****ler! Bu****ler!

By the way, I am not a fan of Bush, I think there are tons of US military and intel failures and things are not coming up roses in Iraq.

f. Finally we arrive at the real agenda of this administration: war for profit and nothing else. Their speeches, their actions only serve one of two aims: either to keep the people distracted by the sideshow and subservient to their agenda, or to directly further that agenda by pushing through legislation and Executive Orders that keep the profits coming to the right family members, friends, lobbyists, and campaign contributors.

Your delirious rantings are typical of people who what a story to convey the facts rather than the facts conveying the story. Once again, pathetic.

[scandium]

Originally Posted by The Avon Lady

Yada! Yada! Now the old Goering quote. Bu****ler! Bu****ler!

By the way, I am not a fan of Bush, I think there are tons of US military and intel failures and things are not coming up roses in Iraq.

Your delirious rantings are typical of people who what a story to convey the facts rather than the facts conveying the story. Once again, pathetic.

First off, quoting Goering doesn't equate to calling Bush Hitler. Nowhere on this forum have I ever done so.

Secondly, I will happily debate with anyone who has an opposing view to my own (as clearly we do), provided they can do it with civility. However, your persistent habit of attacking me personally (in this thread and others) by calling my posts "delirious rantings" and "pathetic" makes further debate with you pointless and I have no intention of continuing it.

[Abraham]

Originally Posted by The Avon Lady

Your delirious rantings are typical of people who what a story to convey the facts rather than the facts conveying the story. Once again, pathetic.

@ The Avon Lady:
I know you're a fierce debater, but words like "Your delirious rantings" and "pathetic" are a little bit too offensive and personal towards scandium. Please choose your words more carefully.

The two of you are also quite off topic...

Abraham

(with moderator cap on)

edit: I didn't know scandium's reply yet when I posted this.

[Konovalov]

Originally Posted by scandium

First off, quoting Goering doesn't equate to calling Bush Hitler. Nowhere on this forum have I ever done so.

Secondly, I will happily debate with anyone who has an opposing view to my own (as clearly we do), provided they can do it with civility. However, your persistent habit of attacking me personally (in this thread and others) by calling my posts "delirious rantings" and "pathetic" makes further debate with you pointless and I have no intention of continuing it.

Well said and well done in not dropping down to that level.

[The Avon Lady]

My apologies to Scandium and everyone else. Even though it might appropriate for SubSim, I went overboard.