Enron Tapes!!! - Page 8

strandinthewind · #**106** 06-03-2004, 08:18 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dissention

You finally said it! Hooray!

Kerry advocated air strikes to make Saddam comply with IAEA and UNSCOM inspections (you know, the org's that he kicked out after it was discovered that some of the inspectors were US spies). What he did not advocate was invading the country. See the difference?

I see the difference, but my point is in 2002 he used the same rationale to advocate and support W using force "if necessary" against Iraq and to this day he has not backed off of his position (since 1998) that SH had WMD and was a threat to the world. That is the same position W has. So, the two are in this together IMO. And, I still maintain that the 1998 vote was made with the clear understanding that the missile strikes could start an all out war because it was widely believed at the time that SH would retaliate by striking Isreal. I mean I remember reading about Clinton having to threaten Israel with huge consequences if it responded in kind to SH's threatened retalitory missile launching. So, Clinton's missile launching was made with the full knowledge that it could start a war that would have been IMO far worse than the current one, which does not involve Israel in the fighting, etc.

In the end, I totally get that Kerry did not order the US to invade Iraq. W did and the buck stops there as it concerns W. All I am saying is Kerry has been calling for and promoting this same type of thing since 1998, he has not to this day backed off of that position, and he totally espoused and still espouses the whole SH had WMD and therefore he must be removed rhetoric (i.e. W coerced Kerry into nothing - Kerry was already there and is still there today). I see the slight distinctions in Kerry's position (most of which were made in hindsight) - but to me Kerry is not and never has been against the war in Iraq to remove SH and the WMD. He just, again mostly in hidsight, spun it to say, well although I would have done the same thing, I would not have done it that way. So, Kerry clearly supports the war in Iraq. If someone does not support the war in Iraq and does not believe there are no and never were any WMD, then they have to disagree with Kerry just as they disagree with W on this sole issue (I am not talking about W's lying about the exigent nature of the threat, etc. - that mostly was W on his own). Does that make sense?

Again, I am no fan of W's. I am just pointing out that W and Kerry were on the same page when it came to invading Iraq and W's lying did not get Kerry there.

dissention · #**107** 06-03-2004, 08:42 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by strandinthewind

I canot believe you guys are making fun of me when I have made a legitimate agrument. You KNOW I am not arguing W is excused because Clinton and Kerry did it too. Let's play fair or not at all.

Oh, she was only joking, doll. And it gave me a hearty laugh, how about you?

strandinthewind · #**108** 06-03-2004, 08:45 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dissention

Oh, she was only joking, doll. And it gave me a hearty laugh, how about you?

I know - I was just in a mood last night!!!!!!! No harm no foul - you pinko commie liberal

dissention · #**109** 06-03-2004, 08:47 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by strandinthewind

I know - I was just in a mood last night!!!!!!! No harm no foul - you pinko commie liberal

You can add card-carrying ACLU member to that, thankyouverymuch.

strandinthewind · #**110** 06-03-2004, 08:52 AM

Speaking of the ACLU and since this thread has gone everywhere but on topic

- did you see the City of LA caved and agreed to take the tiny cross off of city's seal. They left the pagan goddess Pamona on it, but they took the cross off

I mean don't ya think the ACLU should have asked for both to be removed, which I think in theory they should have done even though I get the point that the cross was there to symbolize the monks founding the "City of the Angels"

The Tower · #**111** 06-03-2004, 10:34 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by strandinthewind

Speaking of the ACLU and since this thread has gone everywhere but on topic

- did you see the City of LA caved and agreed to take the tiny cross off of city's seal. They left the pagan goddess Pamona on it, but they took the cross off

I mean don't ya think the ACLU should have asked for both to be removed, which I think in theory they should have done even though I get the point that the cross was there to symbolize the monks founding the "City of the Angels"

Considering that the worship of Pomona is a long, long dead religion that has no effect on the world today, I don't really see a conflict.

Didja ever see the South Park xmas episode where they started out banning overt christian references from a school presentation? It kept going and going and going like the energizer bunny until all they were left with was a "black leotard dance" with Philip Glass as the accompaniment.

It amazes me how black and white the world has become. There is no longer the idea of subtlety.

It's kinda like with dollars: I think the "in god we trust" definitely has to go, whereas the pyramid and masonic stuff has no meaning anymore.

strandinthewind · #**112** 06-03-2004, 10:44 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Tower

Considering that the worship of Pomona is a long, long dead religion that has no effect on the world today, I don't really see a conflict.

Didja ever see the South Park xmas episode where they started out banning overt christian references from a school presentation? It kept going and going and going like the energizer bunny until all they were left with was a "black leotard dance" with Philip Glass as the accompaniment.

It amazes me how black and white the world has become. There is no longer the idea of subtlety.

It's kinda like with dollars: I think the "in god we trust" definitely has to go, whereas the pyramid and masonic stuff has no meaning anymore.

I know - this Christian Coalitionesq woman was on O'Reilly last night screaming about the evil Wiccans still worshipping Pamona, which prompted the Rev. Barry Lynn to shriek about removing all religious symbols from all public space. I mean there is a difference in my head to the tiny cross (put in I think in 1947) right next to Pamona on the LA shield and some judge in AL putting a several ton and huge granite replica of the 10 Commandments and saying "THIS IS THE LAW HERE"

But, if anyone is to blame, it is fundamentalist Christians for trying to sneak these little Christian symbols in and lie about the intent. "Under God" in the POA is a good example. I mean that phrase is fairly generic to almost all Americans - it could mean Allah, Buddah, etc. And - the reason it was put in in the 1950's was allegedly to stop "Godless Communism" from taking over America. Then, when ya delve into the issue a little deeper you see the fundamentalist Christians who put forth the measure wanted "Under Jesus" and settled for "Under God." Fast Forward to today and we see the vast majority of Americans think "Under God" has been there since the beginning

So, I just am indecisive on the whole religious symbol thing. I usually conclude they all have to go because the fundamentalist Christians cannot be trusted not to try to sneak things in with an ostensibly benign intent, and then once many are in, they can say, well look we have all of these. Anyway, food for thought!!!!

gldstwmn · #**113** 06-04-2004, 09:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by strandinthewind

I canot believe you guys are making fun of me when I have made a legitimate agrument. You KNOW I am not arguing W is excused because Clinton and Kerry did it too. Let's play fair or not at all.

I'm not making fun of you. Your argument blows, however. Oops!