Download A Book Get Arrested, Call For Terror Attacks - No Problem!

[poncho]

University employee jailed for researching Al-Qaeda, while Gingrich and others left alone for encouraging dead Americans.

A University employee downloads a document from the Internet about Al-Qaeda for a colleague in the politics department as part of the University's required reading list, meanwhile, a former Speaker of the House publicly laments the fact that more Americans have not been killed in terrorist attacks. Who gets arrested under terrorism legislation? The University employee of course!


Welcome to the up is down, down is up twilight zone of the post-9/11 world!​

Full Article...

hypocrite

1 : a person who puts on a false appearance of virtue or religion

2 : a person who acts in contradiction to his or her stated beliefs or feelings

 

[Pastor Larry]

a former Speaker of the House publicly laments the fact that more Americans have not been killed in terrorist attacks. Who gets arrested under terrorism legislation?

Anyone with even the remotest semblance of intelligence can see that Gingrich was not "publicly lamenting" that more Americans have not been killed.

He was making a specific rhetorical point about the successes of the current policies that seem to make things safer than they might be.

This reminds me of part of what's wrong with public discourse ... Most people have no common sense. They are stupid when it comes to rhetoric and conversation. And they are such because they are politically blinded. Prisonplanet is a great example of such stupidity. And compounding it is that people do not know how to think enough to see through it.

 

[exscentric]

"remotest semblance of intelligence"

In here, surely you jest! :thumbs:

 

[poncho]

Anyone with even the remotest semblance of intelligence can see that Gingrich was not "publicly lamenting" that more Americans have not been killed.

He was making a specific rhetorical point about the successes of the current policies that seem to make things safer than they might be.

This reminds me of part of what's wrong with public discourse ... Most people have no common sense. They are stupid when it comes to rhetoric and conversation. And they are such because they are politically blinded. Prisonplanet is a great example of such stupidity. And compounding it is that people do not know how to think enough to see through it.

He was along with many others (who you conveniently overlook) making the same point as the 2005 Republican memo in which they all concured the best thing that could happen to further their neocon agenda would be the violent death of more citizens. PL you really need to keep up to date on these things your lack of knowledge in this area alone should disqualify you to even speak on such subjects. The only input you can possibly contribute is to dignify these murderers and would be murderers with excuses and unlearned rationalizations based only on public "consensus".

I'm surprised a man in your profession would be so quick to side with criminals but then that's the way of it in post 9/11 Amerika. Up is down black is white good is evil war is peace tyranny is security. Think I'll just call you Winston from now on but then even he knew there was something not quite right about what he was being told by the "officials". :smilewinkgrin:

 

[KenH]

He was along with many others (who you conveniently overlook) making the same point as the 2005 Republican memo in which they all concured the best thing that could happen to further their neocon agenda would be the violent death of more citizens.

As Randolph Bourne stated, poncho: "War is the health of the state."

 

[poncho]

As Randolph Bourne stated, poncho: "War is the health of the state."

Yes indeed and false flag terrorism has always been a favored tool of the state to consolidate power and empty the pockets of it's citizens and gain control of their lives and property. This is common all through history tyrants who crave unchecked power have no cumpunction when it comes to saisfying their lust.

 

[Pastor Larry]

He was along with many others (who you conveniently overlook) making the same point as the 2005 Republican memo in which they all concured the best thing that could happen to further their neocon agenda would be the violent death of more citizens.

I wasn't overlooking anyone or anything. I was commenting on the use of rhetoric in communication, something you apparently are unfamiliar with.

It is true that had there been more violent deaths, the war on terror would have a much greater viability. But saying that doesn't mean one wishes that more deaths had occurred. It is simply an argumentative/rhetorical device for communication.

PL you really need to keep up to date on these things your lack of knowledge in this area alone should disqualify you to even speak on such subjects.

I need to keep up? How is citing a memo from 2005 "keeping up"?

But to the point, I don't need to keep up on the topic. I am not that interested in it. I was simply making a statement about communication and the use of rhetoric, not about conspiracy theories.

The only input you can possibly contribute is to dignify these murderers and would be murderers with excuses and unlearned rationalizations based only on public "consensus".

I have not dignified anyone with either excuses or unlearned rationalization. I would appreciate an apology and a more guarded use of your posting privileges.

I'm surprised a man in your profession would be so quick to side with criminals but then that's the way of it in post 9/11 Amerika. Up is down black is white good is evil war is peace tyranny is security. Think I'll just call you Winston from now on but then even he knew there was something not quite right about what he was being told by the "officials".

I haven't sided with criminals. You are able to read, Poncho. You are of reasonable intelligence. Don't make these dumb mistakes attributing something to me I never said. If you don't understand the point (which you apparently didn't), feel free to ask and I will attempt to explain it again. But don't make false accusations against me.

 

[Ivon Denosovich]

"This is ... one of the great tragedies of the Bush administration," Gingrich continued. "The more successful they've been at intercepting and stopping bad guys, the less proof there is that we're in danger. And therefore, the better they've done at making sure there isn't an attack, the easier it is to say, 'Well, there never was going to be an attack anyway.' And it's almost like they should every once in a while have allowed an attack to get through just to remind us."

One of life's great tragedies is that there isn't more of them.

 

[Pastor Larry]

So, if you asked Gingrich if you were rightly representing his comments, what do you think he would say?

 

[KenH]

It's a shame, Ivon, that Newt would make such comment. He is smarter than that and knows better than that.

 

[Ivon Denosovich]

It's a shame, Ivon, that Newt would make such comment. He is smarter than that and knows better than that.

Up until today I had the upmost respect for Newt. As of 24 hours ago he was one of my favorite Republicans. In fact, here I wished McCain would chose him as a running mate noting that Gingrich would pull people like me back into the GOP.

As of today, Gingrich is either obligated to provide context for his words (and what context could justify such sentiments is a gold medal placement in verbal gymnastics) or should do his country and his party great service by refraining from such loose dialogue.

 

[Pastor Larry]

So if you asked Gingrich if you were rightly representing his words, what would he say?

 

[Pastor Larry]

Perhaps your unwillingness to answer the question (now asked twice) is evidence that you are believe you are misrepresenting Gingrich's words, but you do not want to own up to it publicly.

 

[Ivon Denosovich]

He was along with many others (who you conveniently overlook) making the same point as the 2005 Republican memo in which they all concured the best thing that could happen to further their neocon agenda would be the violent death of more citizens.

The amazing thing is, poncho, that to quote (verbatim, no less) such evidence isn't as convincing to neocons as erecting hypothetical quotes via biased speculation in their defense. To ardent defenders of the Iraq War (of which I used to be) tangible, empirical evidence of national disrespect (i.e. Gingrich's comments here, Bush's press corps joke about the nonexistent WMD's 4,000 soldiers dies looking for) will be forever dismissed, explained away, or shrugged at instead of shouted from the rooftops. As to what evidence exists explaining the natural intentions of a quote are antithetical to verbatim renderings we'll never know. Good stuff, poncho. Thx for the info!

 

[Pastor Larry]

As to what evidence exists explaining the natural intentions of a quote are antithetical to verbatim renderings we'll never know.

Again you are avoiding the issue. Why? Are you ashamed?

Have you no understanding of communication and rhetoric? Irony in defense of the obvious?

It always amazes me that honesty is so wanting on a supposedly Christian forum.

 

[Pastor Larry]

Perhaps my suspicion is being confirmed that there are no depths to which some will not stoop in their defense of the unimaginable.

 

[Pastor Larry]

And still no response??

Not one of you who are making these accusations are willing to stand up and say you think you are rightly representing Gingrich's comments?

 

[poncho]

He said what he said PL as did many others there is no mistaking their convictions.

The PNACer's, Brzezinski, Gingrich and a host of other neocons and their supporters, even the 2005 memo says the same thing. They have consensus.

You seem to be the odd man out denying all that has been said and written.

Denial of the facts is quite foolish at this point imho. Their own words policy papers and history prove you to be wrong. Do yourself and your fellow countrymen a favor PL stop chasing your tail around in circles acting as if all that has been said and written by these people really means something else altogether. Get educated on this subject and be a patriot instead of trying in vain to run interferance for these criminals.

Perhaps my suspicion is being confirmed that there are no depths to which some will not stoop in their defense of the unimaginable.

Perhaps you are blinded by your faith in the state and the idea that "our" government is incapable of such acts PL. History shows a very different picture. Liberty is an abberation and tyranny is the norm all throughout history. An educated man such as yourself should know this. Why you do not is beyond my powers of comprehension. But then maybe you do know and you just enjoy playing the devil's advocate which I find strange for a man in your vocation.

So I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and believe you are just whoafully uninformed and have no interest in becoming fully informed.

 

[just-want-peace]

University employee jailed for researching Al-Qaeda, while Gingrich and others left alone for encouraging dead Americans.

A University employee downloads a document from the Internet about Al-Qaeda for a colleague in the politics department as part of the University's required reading list,meanwhile, a former Speaker of the House publicly laments the fact that more Americans have not been killed in terrorist attacks. Who gets arrested under terrorism legislation? The University employee of course!​

Welcome to the up is down, down is up twilight zone of the post-9/11 world!​

Full Article...

hypocrite

1 : a person who puts on a false appearance of virtue or religion

2 : a person who acts in contradiction to his or her stated beliefs or feelings

Emphasis mine

I have read some really tinfoil-hat ideas from the conspiricy nuts, but to read what is posted above (emphasized) makes the "C" theories mild in comparison.

If this is an example of reading comprehension, it's no wonder this country is in trouble.

All one has to do is read the complete article to see precisely what Newt IS REALLY saying and to make the above claim is, <personal attack deleted - LE>!!!!!:BangHead::BangHead::BangHead:

 

[poncho]

Emphasis mine

I have read some really tinfoil-hat ideas from the conspiricy nuts, but to read what is posted above (emphasized) makes the "C" theories mild in comparison.

If this is an example of reading comprehension, it's no wonder this country is in trouble.

All one has to do is read the complete article to see precisely what Newt IS REALLY saying and to make the above claim is, IMNSHO, nothing but lying pure & simple!!!!!:BangHead::BangHead::BangHead:

Actually one has to read everything these criminals have written and said to get the complete picture. I have no hope of you or PL doing so however because that would be the sensible thing to do. It's far easier to just take the talking heads word for everything even after they have been caught lying and using propagandists employed by the military industrial complex. People behaving as sheople is why this country is in such bad shape.

One has to be whoafully under informed to even think that actual real Americans are running this country after all that has come out about the globalists and globalism at this point in time. Sure you want to believe that the state has your best interests at heart and could never intentionally harm you to further an agenda that is completely alien and destructive to our government (the constitutional one) but it's happening and it's been happening for a very very long time.

It's not my fault you won't take it upon yourself to see the whole picture. So stop acting as if it is.