• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Jimmy Carter: Wilson comments 'based on racism'

Devil505 said:
Re-read this & other threads on this subject. Plenty has been posted already.
Click to expand...

Simple falsehood.

"Oh I have it, I just don't have it on me" :roll:

If you had it, you would have posted it, but you don't, because "it" is non-existant.
 
jallman said:
I didn't really get much further than this before I noticed the avatar and user title. :shock:

Shock and awe. Shock and awe.

Too funny.
Click to expand...

I was tempted to go for Irony and change my sig line to

"Sherman. Great General? Or Greatest General?"

(answer is greatest. Total War baby, WOO)

But I've enjoyed the sig line pointing out the defening silence too much to lose it for the moment.

Now someone just needs to comment on how racist I am for having the Confederate Flag up on my avatar and I can politely inform them that no, I do not, its not on a white field. Its fun educating people of that common misconception that the Battle Flag in and of itself is the actual "Confederate Flag".
 
Last edited:
Zyphlin said:
And those people are generally hacks, extremely partisan agenda driven people, are extremely ignorant folks...or a mix of the three.

Making an argument that Bush's administrations actions played into it could legitimately be made. Making one that its directly due to them is absolutely asinine and strains credibility and logical thought, not to mention would make any honest and neutral person with any knowledge of national security and intellegence gathering blush at the mere thought of it. The amount of threats recieved on a daily basis is staggering, and even serious threats are hardly an uncommon thing. There was little logical true information and trying to pick one questionable thing, the planes, out of a field of hundreds of potential questionable things is like picking a needle out of a hay stack.

Nevermind that even if you go with the "Ineptness of Bush administration" theory you still could not lay the entire blame on them as its impossible, if you're going to blame Presidents, to not lay some at the feet of Clinton and indeed a more logical and strong argument could be made to place the blame on Clinton...though those that try to put the whole of the blame on him are also being foolish. From the piss poor reactions to the 1993 bombs, the embassy bombings, the kobar tower bombings, and the USS Cole bombings...to the Gorelick Wall that cause the actual Law Enforcement and Intelligence agencies and groups within the country from sharing information that would've made putting the pieces of the puzzle together FAR more likely than anything Bush could've done...to not capitalizing on taking out the head of the organization when it was possible, one can not soley or even majoritily put the blame on the Bush Administration alone while ignoring the Clinton administrations own actions.

No sir, you're just flat out wrong and make yourself look foolish in even trying to drum up this argument in the phony and rather pathetic disguise of you claiming that this is what others are saying to try to distance it from being your own obvious thought.
Click to expand...

And aside from all this . . . can you imagine what these (*ahem*) critics of Bush would have said if he had taken the steps necessary to stop it from happening? The howls about how it was all a power grab, and how there was no direct evidence in the slightest that something so "preposterous" was likely to happen? Think about everything that would have had to have been to stop the specific 9/11 operation based on the information they had . . .
 
Devil505 said:
Many believe that the 9/11 attack was successful directly due to the ineptness of the Bush administration in:

1. Taking the entire month off (preceding the attack) AFTER being warned by the CIA that an Al Quieda attack was imminent

AND

2. Dismissing the FBI warnings that Arab men were paying cash to learn how to fly airliners.......Not take-off or landings...Just flight.
Click to expand...

Once again, the “many” you speak of is a tiny minority of uninformed conspiracy theorists.

I am amused that you think this represents mainstream thought processes.

Devil505 said:
So...A good argument can be made that Bush & the GOP were derelict in their national security duties both before the 9/11 attack & after in the failing to ever get Bin Ladin & diverting attention to Iraq for oil.
Click to expand...

I am still looking for that “good” argument and to date, NONE exist. You are welcome to attempt to re-write the historic facts and pretend that the conspiracies you obviously bought into based on your partisan bias are facts, but I assure you that your attempts, as the many others that blather the internet, will be nothing more than more of the same; nonsensical lies promoted in an attempt to impugn those you disagree with politically.

But hey, maybe you have uncovered some new credible facts and their sources you can link here so that I can become more informed?
:rofl
 
Zyphlin said:
Now someone just needs to comment on how racist I am for having the Confederate Flag up on my avatar and I can politely inform them that no, I do not, its not on a white field.
Click to expand...

What a racist flag! How dare you?! :shock:
 
Zyphlin said:
And those people are generally hacks, extremely partisan agenda driven people, are extremely ignorant folks...or a mix of the three.

Making an argument that Bush's administrations actions played into it could legitimately be made. Making one that its directly due to them is absolutely asinine and strains credibility and logical thought, not to mention would make any honest and neutral person with any knowledge of national security and intellegence gathering blush at the mere thought of it. The amount of threats recieved on a daily basis is staggering, and even serious threats are hardly an uncommon thing. There was little logical true information and trying to pick one questionable thing, the planes, out of a field of hundreds of potential questionable things is like picking a needle out of a hay stack.

Nevermind that even if you go with the "Ineptness of Bush administration" theory you still could not lay the entire blame on them as its impossible, if you're going to blame Presidents, to not lay some at the feet of Clinton and indeed a more logical and strong argument could be made to place the blame on Clinton...though those that try to put the whole of the blame on him are also being foolish. From the piss poor reactions to the 1993 bombs, the embassy bombings, the kobar tower bombings, and the USS Cole bombings...to the Gorelick Wall that cause the actual Law Enforcement and Intelligence agencies and groups within the country from sharing information that would've made putting the pieces of the puzzle together FAR more likely than anything Bush could've done...to not capitalizing on taking out the head of the organization when it was possible, one can not soley or even majoritily put the blame on the Bush Administration alone while ignoring the Clinton administrations own actions.

No sir, you're just flat out wrong and make yourself look foolish in even trying to drum up this argument in the phony and rather pathetic disguise of you claiming that this is what others are saying to try to distance it from being your own obvious thought.
Click to expand...

Wow, that was much harsher than my response; but here we are in agreement. :shock:
 
Ikari said:
I think what's going on with the parties currently is partisan party politics, as per usual. No, they didn't care about spending before and some try to make it seem like they care about spending now. They don't. The Republicans and Democrats bicker and complain about the other side all the time. They aren't consistent, they rarely have valid point. That's another reason why I don't think this case with Wilson is motivated by racism. I see it as typical partisan politics.

And Obama's HC will be a play to the insurance companies as well. The Democrats are just as bought as the Republicans. Obama knows who his "friends" are.
Click to expand...

Some indisputable truths there but where we disagree is the amount of cynicism/corruptness of the 2 major parties.
I totally agree that both parties receive bribes ......oops......"Campaign Contributions" from the insurance industry, which is why I favor strict term limits & ending ALL bribes...damn....(can't stop myself) "Campaign Contributions" to ANY politician or party....but that's for another thread.

What I disagree with is the idea that both parties are equally corrupt. The GOP....imo....Is almost totally the mouthpiece of bg oil, big insurance & big ANYTHING that is business related.
The only interests they don't represent are those of middle class American citizens.

I think the Dems are much more in tune with them (average Americans) than the GOP & a little less corrupt in term of being run by special interests.

Again......just my opinion.
 
Last edited:
Zyphlin said:
I was tempted to go for Irony and change my sig line to

"Sherman. Great General? Or Greatest General?"

(answer is greatest. Total War baby, WOO)

But I've enjoyed the sig line pointing out the defening silence too much to lose it for the moment.

Now someone just needs to comment on how racist I am for having the Confederate Flag up on my avatar and I can politely inform them that no, I do not, its not on a white field.
Click to expand...

That is so racist; I am in shock and awe that you would even include that in your avatar and is a flagrant violation of the forum rules as it is a deliberate attempt to bait the uninformed. :2wave:
 
Devil505 said:
Some indisputable truths there but where we disagree is the amount of cynicism/corruptness of the 2 major parties.
I totally agree that both parties receive bribes ......oops......"Campaign Contributions" from the insurance industry, which is why I favor strict term limits & ending ALL bribes...damn....(can't stop myself) "Campaign Contributions" to ANY politician or party....but that's for another thread.

What I disagree with is the idea that both parties are equally corrupt. The GOP....imo....Is almost totally the mouthpiece of bg oil, big insurance & big ANYTHING that is business related.
The only interests they don't represent are those of middle class American citizens.

I think the Dems are much more in tune with them (average Americans) than the GOP & a little less corrupt in term of being run by special interests.

Again......just my opinion.
Click to expand...

That's fine, but the reality of the situation is that both parties pander to their lobbyists. The Republocrats are out for themselves, their power, and their pocket. While each party may have a handful of people here and there that aren't, the whole is entirely corrupted. The Democrats are just as bad as the Republicans. Neither are controlled, both move for larger government and more power and neither are held in check by the People.
 
Zyphlin said:
Making an argument that Bush's administrations actions played into it could legitimately be made. Making one that its directly due to them is absolutely asinine and strains credibility and logical thought, not to mention would make any honest and neutral person with any knowledge of national security and intellegence gathering blush at the mere thought of it.
Click to expand...

I don't believe I said that the 9/11 attack was "directly due to them " (Bush)...I'll go back & check my wording.

What I meant to say was that the attack was as horribly successful as it turned up to be, in large part due to the inept handling of pre-attack information by Bush & his national security team. This ineptness was bordering on Dereliction of Duty, imo.


Edit:
Nope...I was right. Here's my entire post:

Devil505 said:
Many believe that the 9/11 attack was successful directly due to the ineptness of the Bush administration in:

1. Taking the entire month off (preceding the attack) AFTER being warned by the CIA that an Al Quieda attack was imminent

AND

2. Dismissing the FBI warnings that Arab men were paying cash to learn how to fly airliners.......Not take-off or landings...Just flight.


So...A good argument can be made that Bush & the GOP were derelict in their national security duties both before the 9/11 attack & after in the failing to ever get Bin Ladin & diverting attention to Iraq for oil.
Click to expand...




I think I was clear when I said I blamed Bush for the "Success" of the attack.....Not the attack itself.....Big difference.
 
Last edited:
Devil505 said:
Some indisputable truths there but where we disagree is the amount of cynicism/corruptness of the 2 major parties.
I totally agree that both parties receive bribes ......oops......"Campaign Contributions" from the insurance industry, which is why I favor strict term limits & ending ALL bribes...damn....(can't stop myself) "Campaign Contributions" to ANY politician or party....but that's for another thread.

What I disagree with is the idea that both parties are equally corrupt. The GOP....imo....Is almost totally the mouthpiece of bg oil, big insurance & big ANYTHING that is business related.
The only interests they don't represent are those of middle class American citizens.

I think the Dems are much more in tune with them (average Americans) than the GOP & a little less corrupt in term of being run by special interests.

Again......just my opinion.
Click to expand...

I agree, for the first six years of the republican rule, they were indeed the "mouth piece of the special interest" but times have changed, so has the power.

I just wonder if you are willing to now focus on this power, the one who has the purse strings?

You need not look very far.....GE, GM, SEIU, ACORN, the trial lawyers, are you really suggesting that these special interests represent an entire nation?

The sooner you folks understand that these parties are no different, the sooner we can get down to changing this corrupt system.
 
The_Limt said:
You can tell yourself whatever you want to make yourself feel better.

If you want to believe the South was the victim, go ahead.

If you want to believe Southern slave culture was proud and noble, go ahead.

If you want to think the murder and bondage of an entire people was second to tariffs, go ahead.

Other than a few other fringe posters writing in this thread, no one outside of it will take you seriously.
Click to expand...

Why don't you answer his question? Do you know how many Southern families had slaves?
 
Devil505 said:
I don't believe I said that the 9/11 attack was "directly due to them " (Bush)...I'll go back & check my wording.

What I meant to say was that the attack was as horribly successful as it turned up to be, in large part due to the inept handling of pre-attack information by Bush & his national security team. This ineptness was bordering on Dereliction of Duty, imo.
Click to expand...

Reaaaally.

And what exactly is that you think he should have done -- what specific steps should he have taken -- to stop it from happening, based on the information he had? Specifics. Oh, and be 100% consistent with the Bill of Rights.
 
The_Limt said:
Most of Wilson's own allies didn't even vote to keep flying the Confederate flag.

Don't tell me Wilson isn't at least a closet racist, you don't vote to keep a flag that represents hatred, slavery and racism and then think you're a multi-cultural accepting modern citizen of the world.
Click to expand...




:lol: ignorance is fun! :roll:
 
Truth Detector said:
I know........ I am sure Laila has a waiting list. :rofl
Click to expand...

Surprisingly no ... I am keeping my shed open for Colin Firth to come knocking. I know .... but a girl can dream.
 
Laila said:
Surprisingly no ... I am keeping my shed open for Colin Firth to come knocking. I know .... but a girl can dream.
Click to expand...

Doesn't he prefer the company of men? Maybe that's Rupert Everett. ;)
 
Devil505 said:
I think I was clear when I said I blamed Bush for the "Success" of the attack.....Not the attack itself.....Big difference.
Click to expand...

Yes, you were clear. And my points all remain extremely valid and spot on in regards to whether you're talking about the attack itself or the success of the attack itself. Placing the majority or all the blame on the Bush Administration for the success is complete and utter ignorance and strains all credibility. If one is to put it on any president a stronger case could still be put on Clinton for why the attacks were successful. Even then though, you couldn't say it was a majority his fault. The attacks were successful for a plethora of reasons and only an absolute hack, someone ignorant of the situation, or someone blindly hyper partisan...or a mix of them all...could in any way shape or form say that a majority or all the blame should, could, or does fall on a singular administration.
 
Harshaw said:
Doesn't he prefer the company of men? Maybe that's Rupert Everett. ;)
Click to expand...

Don't break my heart or dreams. Shagging him is on my 'to do' list.
I can share with other men ... =P

The Pride and Predjudice scene he does when he is in the river works for me everytime
 
Harshaw said:
Reaaaally.

And what exactly is that you think he should have done -- what specific steps should he have taken -- to stop it from happening, based on the information he had? Specifics. Oh, and be 100% consistent with the Bill of Rights.
Click to expand...

1. Not discount the warnings of field FBI agents concerned about Arab men , paying with cash, for flight lessons to fly airliners...in flight.
2. Not (listen to a CIA PDI (Presidential Daily Briefing) warning of imminent attack within the U.S.....one month before the attack itself...& then) go on vacation for the entire month of August/2001.


Those are just for starters! (II don't think either suggestion would have violated the Bill of Rights...Do you?)
 
Last edited:
Moderator's Warning:
Here's a great way to end some of the personal attacks I see, here. The Limit, NO ONE has defended slavery and this has explained over and over to you. Your insistence in accusing others of doing so is trolling. Cease this behavior immediately. In the history of DP, I have only thread banned ONE person for such continuous dishonest and trolling behavior. You will be #2 if you do not stop trolling and derailing the thread.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom