[CreepingDeth]

Is terrorism buy radical Islam (9/11 for example) evil?

[Zimphire]

Indeed.

[CreepingDeth]

This seems like one of those obvious polls that people will say the exact opposite on.

[BRussell]

Only terrorism against the American imperialists will finally bring them to their knees so John Kerry and the communists can finally lead the proletariat to unity.

[CreepingDeth]

Man you are tooo funny! You wish death upon innocents.
Once again, I will give you the benefit of the doubt. You probably forgot the meds this morning, because there's no way you can be serious. Are you being sarcastic? Vote on the poll.

[Stradlater]

Good vs. Evil. PPV.

[CreepingDeth]

PPV? Pardon?

[Zimphire]

Pay Per View.

[CreepingDeth]

Originally posted by Zimphire:
Pay Per View.

Fixed.
I'd pay to see a fight between evil terrorists and the US. But that's what news is for.

[Scientist]

What is 'evil' anyways?

[CreepingDeth]

What is absolutely wrong, sinful, evil, demented, ****ed up, etc.

[Zimphire]

Originally posted by Scientist:
What is 'evil' anyways?

e·vil __ _P___Pronunciation Key__(vl)
adj. e·vil·er, e·vil·est
Morally bad or wrong; wicked: an evil tyrant.

[Stradlater]

In other words: whatever you want it to be.

[CreepingDeth]

In other words, you just justified it.

Here's what I think:



Terrorist can go get Zaire strain of Ebola. That stuff has like a 95% of dropping you in a week. Very brutal and graphic. Go read "The Hot Zone."

[Zimphire]

Originally posted by Stradlater:
In other words: whatever you want it to be.

Well I guess that would be true. A person can rationalize anything as being "Good"

But not if you are honest with yourself.

[Scientist]

Originally posted by CreepingDeath:
Here's what I think:

Yes, that pic is evil...or close to it

[CreepingDeth]

Why?

[Zimphire]

Because America defending itself is EVIL!

[CreepingDeth]

Originally posted by Zimphire:
Because America defending itself is EVIL!

Yeah! **** America! Those ****ers are evil! They're the evil ones! Terrorists are the freedom fighters! They are the REVOLUTION, the minutemen!
Americans must die so the proletariat can rise up! America is a legitimate target!

[zachs]

Are Terrorist Attacks by Radical Islam Evil?

Terrorist attacks by any group are evil.

[CreepingDeth]

When's the last time a nun and a Jew took a plane into a building? Never.

Of course, give us you relativistic excuse as to why we are the terrorists and we must elect Kerry.

[zachs]

Originally posted by CreepingDeath:
When's the last time a nun and a Jew took a plane into a building? Never.

If they did, it would be evil. Yes?

[CreepingDeth]

Yeah, but at the present time, it is 100% more likely a terrorist who will attack us will be a muslim. Statistics. 100% of the people who have hijacked planes are Muslim.

[zachs]

Originally posted by CreepingDeath:
Yeah, but at the present time, it is 100% more likely a terrorist who will attack us will be a muslim. Statistics. 100% of the people who have hijacked planes are Muslim.

Wasn't aware that this was about the statistical probability of a Muslim attacking vs. a person of another religion.

Doesn't change the fact that terror attacks committed by any group are evil.

[CreepingDeth]

That still doesn't change who's really out to get us.

[zachs]

Originally posted by CreepingDeath:
That still doesn't change who's really out to get us.

Never said Islamic extremists weren't "out to get us."

[CreepingDeth]

Anyway, if those people even try to do something, most likely worse than 9/11, I'm afraid this liberal love-fest board won't like what will happen.

What would you do if they blew up a NASCAR event (300,000) next week?

(who said terror is okay?)

[zachs]

Originally posted by CreepingDeath:
Anyway, if those people even try to do something, most likely worse than 9/11, I'm afraid this liberal love-fest board won't like what will happen.

You're right. Liberals would not like a terrorist attack.

What would you do if they blew up a NASCAR event (300,000) next week?

Not sit around for 7 minutes reading about a pet goat, that's for sure.

(who said terror is okay?)

Osama?

[CreepingDeth]

What was he going to do? Run out and go stop them? Scare the kids? Hell, I stopped for a minute or two when I heard it, I couldn't believe it actually happened.

Originally posted by CreepingDeath:
What would you do if they blew up a NASCAR event (300,000) next week?

Does anyone remember what the Football is?

No, someone said it's not evil on the poll.

[zachs]

Originally posted by CreepingDeath:
What was he going to do? Run out and go stop them? Scare the kids? Hell, I stopped for a minute or two when I heard it, I couldn't believe it actually happened.

Who said he had to run out of there without saying a word. Who said he had to "scare the kids?" Why couldn't he have said something to the effect of, "I'm very sorry, but I have some important President business I have to take of," and calmly walked out?

[CreepingDeth]

"But why do you have to go?" It's petty, and even the 9/11 commission said he did the right thing there.

The Football is the briefcase carried around by a marine that clears a nuclear attack, I believe.

[zachs]

Originally posted by CreepingDeath:
"But why do you have to go?" It's petty, and even the 9/11 commission said he did the right thing there.

You do realize he told them about the attacks eventually...right?

The Football is the briefcase carried around by a marine that clears a nuclear attack, I believe.

Wow! I never knew that!

[CreepingDeth]

So where would I use it? Hmm…Afghanistan has almost nothing there. I'm thinking "high impact* areas. Hmmm. Saudi Arabia has too much oil, so we can always do surgical strikes. We could also attack Iran, and destroy some gov't locations in S.A.
Let's see:
Assholes attack=300,000x3=900,000. Iran=70,000,000. 900,000<70,000,000. Weak bombing attack might do some damage.

Also, more troops to search for OBL, racial profiling, border control, Intn'l background checks, stepped up sting operations, etc., are also called for in such a situation. An attack 100x more powerful requires some action.

[lurkalot]

Originally posted by CreepingDeath:
So where would I use it? Hmm…Afghanistan has almost nothing there. I'm thinking "high impact* areas. Hmmm. Saudi Arabia has too much oil, so we can always do surgical strikes. We could also attack Iran, and destroy some gov't locations in S.A.
Let's see:
Assholes attack=300,000x3=900,000. Iran=70,000,000. 900,000<70,000,000. Weak bombing attack might do some damage.

Also, more troops to search for OBL, racial profiling, border control, Intn'l background checks, stepped up sting operations, etc., are also called for in such a situation. An attack 100x more powerful requires some action.

You picked a good day to contemplate nuclear destruction and in a thread about terrorism no less. Different lessons learned, I guess.

[CreepingDeth]

Hell I said it. Go get a piece of paper, and make a little tally of numbers…up to 300,000. Besides, what would you do? Hide in a corner and eat cheese? BS like the scenario I presented require some extreme measure. And I guess you didn't read the thread.

[Wiskedjak]

There is no "evil", just perspective. "Evil" is a religious perspective. Is flying passenger jets into public buildings wrong? Yes. Is invading nations at the cost of thousands of lives without provocation wrong? Yes. Two wrongs don't make a right.

[CreepingDeth]

So there is really no wrong with you. So why is 9/11 wrong is evil is in perspective?

[lurkalot]

Originally posted by CreepingDeath:
Hell I said it. Go get a piece of paper, and make a little tally of numbers…up to 300,000. Besides, what would you do? Hide in a corner and eat cheese? BS like the scenario I presented require some extreme measure. And I guess you didn't read the thread.

Oh, just 300.000. Ok then...

Man you are tooo funny! You wish death upon innocents.

[CreepingDeth]

No, I was aking you to imagine an attack that large on US soil.

[lurkalot]

Originally posted by CreepingDeath:
No, I was aking you to imagine an attack that large on US soil.

So you don't actually want to use the football?

[Zimphire]

Originally posted by zachs:
Who said he had to run out of there without saying a word. Who said he had to "scare the kids?" Why couldn't he have said something to the effect of, "I'm very sorry, but I have some important President business I have to take of," and calmly walked out?

Because he didn't have to. As we have pointed out about 20 times now, it's irrelevant. It wouldn't have changed a thing. It's pettiness like this that cracks me up every time.

[zachs]

Originally posted by Zimphire:
Because he didn't have to. As we have pointed out about 20 times now, it's irrelevant. It wouldn't have changed a thing. It's pettiness like this that cracks me up every time.

No, he should have been scrambling aircraft. NORAD knew that Flights 175 and 11 had been hijacked at around 8:40. 9/11 Timeline.

[ThinkInsane]

Originally posted by CreepingDeath:
The Football is the briefcase carried around by a marine that clears a nuclear attack, I believe.

Or a soldier, or sailor or airman. Any military officer that has clearance can carry it, and it changes often. And it doesn't clear a nuclear attack, it contains a satcom phone, the gold codes, and a response/target manuel (the "playbook").

[B]When's the last time a nun and a Jew took a plane into a building? Never.[/b}

The Provisional IRA and the UVF are widely recognized as terrorist organizations, and the are Catholic and Protestant respectively. Not all terrorists are Muslim.

100% of the people who have hijacked planes are Muslim.

So are you just sitting around making up statistics? When I was a kid, I remember there being plenty of hijackings on the news, some were islamic extremists, and many of them were people wanting transport to places like Cuba. To say 100% of hijackings are by Muslims is flat out incorrect.

You know, some of you guys make it hard to stay on the right. Posting ignorance does not help your cause.

[CreepingDeth]

Originally posted by lurkalot:
So you don't actually want to use the football?

No, I was saying if such an unimaginable even ever occured, the result would not be too kind. I've thrown that scenario out to my father (partisan democrat, Bush-hater, etc.), and he said "I sure as hell hope we got something going[nuclear or heavy arms attacks]."

If they blew up NYC…millions…then that would put those Polaris missiles to work.

[Zimphire]

Originally posted by zachs:
No, he should have been scrambling aircraft. NORAD knew that Flights 175 and 11 had been hijacked at around 8:40. 9/11 Timeline.

AH.. yes. Zach knows better than the 9/11 commission itself. Who admitted that what the president did did not effect the outcome whatsoever. That no matter what he would have done, what happened would have happened in the order it did.

But just ignore that ok.

[zachs]

Originally posted by Zimphire:
AH.. yes. Zach knows better than the 9/11 commission itself. Who admitted that what the president did did not effect the outcome whatsoever. That no matter what he would have done, what happened would have happened in the order it did.

But just ignore that ok.

Read this. Especially from "The Reaction - Or Lack of One" and on.

[Zimphire]

Originally posted by zachs:
Read this. Especially from "The Reaction - Or Lack of One" and on.

Yes I read it. Just another petty attack.

See zach, they hired a commission to check into all of this. This is a group of professionals that do such a thing for a living. Not self important writers with an agenda.

They all contended that it meant nothing.

[zachs]

Originally posted by Zimphire:
Yes I read it. Just another petty attack.

See zach, they hired a commission to check into all of this. This is a group of professionals that do such a thing for a living. Not self important writers with an agenda.

They all contended that it meant nothing.

<looking through the essay again>

Nope, no "petty attacks" here.

[Zimphire]

Originally posted by zachs:
<looking through the essay again>

Nope, no "petty attacks" here.

Really? none?

"Both images taken at 9:03 a.m.: Bush takes part in a meaningless photo-op, knowing full well the US is already under attack."

Yeah.. none at all.

The WHOLE article was a petty attack.

AGAIN, They did A STUDY on it all. And CAME TO THE CONCLUSION that there was nothing that would have been done DIFFERENT if Bush acted 8 minutes quicker.

NOTHING.

[zachs]

Originally posted by Zimphire:
Really? none?

Yeah.. none at all.

Yes, really. None at all.

I see nothing in that quote that consistutes a "petty attack." Only cold, hard facts.

Unless you are saying he DIDN'T continue with the photo-op while knowing about the attacks. Then you'd be lying.

The WHOLE article was a petty attack.

Of course it was. To you.

AGAIN, They did A STUDY on it all. And CAME TO THE CONCLUSION that there was nothing that would have been done DIFFERENT if Bush acted 8 minutes quicker.

NOTHING.

What page in the report was this on?