Help Me Debunk This Freeper!

[slinkerwink]

Actually, it says "9 out of 10 terrorists agree... Vote Kerry!"

It's funny because it's true. The nation will completely back down against nations that support terrorism if Kerry were elected. Bush keeps our country strong and does what is necesary to protect us. Sorry if that doesn't mesh with your peacenik attitude. But singing kumbaiyah will not stop terrorists from attacking.

By the way, 9/11 did happen during the Bush administration but most of the planning and training took place during the Clinton administration.

Why don't liberals get their facts right? And quoting an ultra-left wing publication is NOT getting your facts right.

the link to the political debate is here:

http://smith.dailyjolt.com/forum/read.html?id=151144

[slinkerwink]

1. kick

[Lautremont]

2. Hmmm.

I'll say only that nine out of ten terrorists would overwhemlingly support the election of a man who has proven spectacularly adept at helping maintain the level of rage against America necessary for people to be willing to sacrifice innocent people along with themselves in order to prove a point. Make no mistake - the terrorists will be quite happy to have Bush back in the saddle, just to provide a good short-hand focal point for global hatred against America.

[sniffa]

3. "most of the pLanning"

happened during cLinton. that's Lame. bush onLy had 9 months to do something.

i wonder why they don't bLame bush1 for the first WTC attack.

i aLso Love how they paint kerry as a pacifist - far from it - or that he doesn't know how to handLe crisis* unLike george w. "7 minutes" bush.


* have you seen the story about kerry saving the repub. senator's Life whiLe everyone eLse in the senate just stood around panicking?

[Vincardog]

4. Bull$hit Bu$hCo has done more to help terrorists than anyone ever

Terrorists have grown from 6000 to 18000 under Bu$h's watch. Osama laughs every time an American bomb kills an Arab child. Quit spreading the lies.

[Liberal OIF Vet]

10. 9/11....

I would debunk his "most of the 9/11 planning happened during the Clinton Administration" like this. A military commander is responsible for EVERYTHING that goes right or WRONG with his unit. It does not matter what happened prior to that commander taking command of that unit, once he has the keys to the car, he gets the glory and the shame. 9/11 happened on GWB's watch. In the military he would have been relieved on the spot for gross negligence. If a General knew he had a unit being over run, but instead of acting, he decided to stay in a meeting, that General would have been charged for negligence.

[Beaverhausen]

5. lots of info here

http://www.snopes.com/rumors/clinton.htm

Also remind him of the Aug. 6th PDB.

[skygazer]

6. I always love the way they manage to blame Clinton

Had it been a Democrat in office when 9/11 occurred they would be screaming for his head on a pike. Hypocrites.

[troubleinwinter]

7. Do not cast pearls before swine.

A waste of time & pearls.

[mr_du04]

8. hell I don't think they care either way

of course Kerry will make thier job harder but in the end they will still hate americans.

[mckara]

9. How About This?

Al-Qaeda Endorses Bush's Bid for Reelection
"A statement from al-Qaeda following the Madrid bombings...said the organization hoped George Bush would win reelection, 'because he acts with force rather than wisdom or shrewdness, and it is his religious fanaticism that will rouse our (Islamic) nation, as has been shown. Being targeted by an enemy is what will wake us from our slumber.' Quoted on the Arabic news Web site www.elaph.com: 'Bayaan lil qa'ida yuhhammal tawqi' kataib abu hafss al massri,' March 17, 2004."

[seabeyond]

11. osama bin laden was nothing but a gang, a thud

until the big and powerful united states only super power declared war on him. osama got exactly what he wanted. and thru bush's narrow vision and inability to see the whole, goin after iraq he created more anger and hositility and recruiting ability for osama.

and he didnt get osama. osama is free

bush has empowered al queda. there is no agruement in that. thru out the middle east people that were moderate are no longer. they have seen the abuse and ineptness, their children and wives and sisters and husbands, mothers and fathers are dieing.

bush went into iraq in greed. not to accomplish some higher mission. and the people in iraq know this as do all those in the middle east

bush is exactly who osama wants in the white house.

after 9/11 osama had the world against him. after bush and iraq, he has a lot more recruits and the anger at bush for him

[MazeRat7]

12. It takes more than strength

It will require more than a "strong" country for us to have a "safe" country. Yes, Bush has kept us strong but that is only a single ingredient in the overall formula for success.

The problem with Bush is he does not know the formula. (Insert any analogy you like here from cooking to chemistry). The rest of this formula has ingredients like statesmanship, intelligence, political insight, and compassion for others (eg. putting yourself in someone else's shoes). They have to be combined in exactly the right proportions to achieve a quality result. Bush and his team do not have the basic skill sets needed to achieve that goal. (Insert failed foreign policy choice here)

My 2cents anyway.. hope that helps.

MZr7

[nyhuskyfan]

13. Here's my comeback...

The intelligence system was blinking red during the summer of 2001 under Bush's watch. He received an August 6 PDB that said that Bin Laden was determined to strike in the United States and stayed on the longest presidential vacation in 32 years, never once discussing the possibliity with anyone on his staff about an impending attack (9/11 Commission report - pp. 260-262). When we were attacked and it was time to perhaps do something to keep us safe, he sat in a chair and read a children's book while the towers burned. The Secretary of Defense didn't even show up until two hours after the first plane hit. There's no question the attack on the Pentagon could have prevented if there had been some leadership somewhere in that administration scrambling jets over our cities.


I guess Clinton should have been on to the fact that they were stockpiling box-cutters, but we never had intelligence about a potential threat within the United States until 2001. And Clinton and the Democrats never blamed Herbert Walker for the first attack on the WTC, which was a month into his presidency.

Then, he goes and lets many of the real terrorists escape in Tora Bora so that he can divert his attention to Iraq, a country which has never attacked us and never threatened to attack us. A country that didn't even have a Scud missile in its arsenal any more. Meanwhile, we are not securing our ports, we are not securing our chemical and nuclear facilities, we are not securing our borders, we are not securing airports or screening cargo on passenger planes, we are not adding funding to first responders, we are not doing anything to protect the homeland at all. You can bomb all you want, but you can't get them all (just ask Israel).

[dave123williams]

14. Here's a tack you might try...

"By the way, 9/11 did happen during the Bush administration but most of the planning and training took place during the Clinton administration."

Well, he's right. Most of the planning and training that WE did happened under the Clinton administration; getting antidotes to anthrax and sarin in place, an active campaign to kill or capture Bin Laden, etc.

As I recall, when Clinton threw a bunch of cruise missiles at Afghanistan, the Republicans accused him of 'wagging the dog.', while they pursued the worst kind of smear campaign against the White house, ultimately resulting in an impeachment THEY KNEW THEY COULDN'T WIN FROM DAY ONE. THEY NEVER HAD THE VOTES.

So, while the threat gathered, they did everything they could do to keep the executive from responding to it. THEY weakened the country, for nothing more than power.

When informed by outgoing NSC adviser Sandy Berger that terrorism was going to be their top priority, he was roundly dismissed by Rice.

It became a policy priority to do the OPPOSITE of whatever Clinton had done, so deep was their hatred of the man.

Bush got in to office, and began pursuing an eight-year-old agenda that included missile defense (an expensive joke), confronting China (remember the guys who got caught in China in their spy-plane right at the beginning of his presidency?), and golf. Lots of golf.

Bush has a) wrecked the diplomatic relations with our allies, b) invaded another country, using a totally discredited rationale (no other American President has been so foolish), c) saddled us with crushing debt in the form of a tax-cut which INARGUABLY favors the richest amongst us.

He...is the worst president we've had since Buchanan.

By the way; had he done what was necessary to protect us, I NEVER WOULD HAVE HAD TO UNDERSTAND WHAT 3000 BURNING HUMANS SMELLS LIKE.

Peacenick attitude? We're now in the worst possible position, because Bush THREW OUT THE 50 YEAR-OLD DOCTRINE OF ASSURED DESTRUCTION. WE KEPT THE PEACE FOR 50 YEARS, BECAUSE EVERYBODY KNEW THAT IF THEY FUCKED WITH US, WE'D WIPE THEM OUT.

We should have NUKED the Afghanis, killing everything in that godforsaken country down to the last blade of grass - the terrorists would have gotten the message, loud and clear. Bush...did what he has done throughout his whole career... he pussied out.

What's going on in Afghanistan, right now? Warlord-ism; a bankrupt country loaded with religious fundamentalists, armed to the teeth, working to insure a 'death by a thousand cuts' to our forces there.

[liberal_in_GA]

15. Why not remind the Freeper

that fifteen of nineteen 9/11 hijackers were from Saudi Arabia? Hmmm... Shrub has gone after that country REALLY hard. (sarcasm). I guess his cousin, the Saudi Arabian prince "Bandhar Bush," wouldn't appreciate all of the negative attention if he did....

[clevergirl]

16. Reply to your little friend

1. So far, the only country the US has "stood up to" was Iraq, which did not support al Qaeda. Do you suggest that the US will "stand up" to other countries by invading Iran or Syria?

2. Singing kumbaya will not stop terrorists, but our war (I assume that's what you mean when you say Bush is standing up against terrorists) has not stopped terrorism. It has, in fact, picked up. Ask the people of Madrid. Or even review the State Department's latest report on terrorism.

3. Bill Clinton made clear when he left office that our greatest defense challenge was terrorism. Bush ignored that wisdom completely.