Read "the politically incorrect guide to Islam" the rest of books on islam r watered down and sugared up to attract converts = suckers or to convince gullible people to consider islam as just another misinterpreted peaceful religion. In Seville, Spain, locals stopped construction of another mosque by burying a pig on the site and made sure the news became know to the local media. Islamic law forbids erecting mosques on "pig soiled ground". The Muslims had to cancel the project outright.
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
Lets talk anout senitivity. Bombing and killing innocent people in a country that never attack on false pretense and then put up a huge embassy the size of vatican city in there war ravaged capitol. Then we can take a poll see how many of teh citizens support it.
The Constitution was written in a time when almost everyone in America was a Christian, Muslims were irrelevant desert shepherds, and poisonous ideologies like Marxism had not even been invented.
If you had suggested at the time that the 1st Amendment protects African cannibalism, Muslim totalitarianism, Mayan human sacrifice, or even Mormon polygamy, you would have just been laughed at.
@twk373 I think this guy is just trolling, after all no one could be this stupid LOL
Islam demands adherence to sharia law, which means if you didn't allow Muslims to beat their wives, girlfriends mothers or stone homosexuals to death than your violating their freedom of religion by not allowing them to.
Judging by how dumb joelef is he probably has a a lot of animosity build up towards his mother, since he lives in her basement He probably likes the idea of that.
Maybe he's trolling, but he's really just reflecting what Jack Hunter said in the above video. Hunter, Paul, etc. are great...I just wish they would wise up when it comes to alien cultures and Islam.
That's as stupid as saying that it's wrong to limit the ability of congress to control our lives. Oh noes, you're trampling on the congressmens' freedom to screw us!
Sorry, but Christians and Jews are peaceful. They are not trying to interfere with anyone. Muslims, like statists, will never be satisfied until every aspect of your life is under their control.
Um, we were right about the communists, retard. How the hell can you pretend to be a libertarian who's supposedly against the expansion of federal power without understanding that communists cum progressives cum leftists are behind it all? If we had effectively resisted the American communists of the early 20th century, we would have none of these problems today.
You can only maintain ideological freedom if you aggressively resist totalitarian ideologies.
@twk373 i think having should have free speech. making people take loyality oaths and mccarthyism was violation of covil liberities. I hate communism but they still have freedom of speeech in this country.
Of course they have freedom of speech. The problem is not that they "have" freedom of speech, but that THEY exercise it, while WE do not. For every stupid communist ranting about the labor theory of value, there should be a thousand conservatives calmly explaining that his economics are bullshit. Unfortunately, people like you sat back and let the communists infiltrate every sector of the government and education system, and now you wonder how we got in this mess. Lol.
@TheJoelef Well, it appears you were far from finished making an ass of yourself LOL
Look, no one is denying Islamic freedom of religion, their own religion possessing values making it incompatible with the laws of the Constitution is what obstructs it. Freedom of religion doesn't give you the right to mutilate animals, beat women or kill gay's. Just as freedom of speech doesn't give you the right to threaten murder and several other things, your knowledge of the Constitution is beyond pitiful
@twk373 you want to ban free speech and freedom of religion which is totaltarism to fight people banning free speech and religion. Hyprocracy at its finest.
@twk373 I must admit it's refreshingly nice to speak with someone intelligent in regards to these issues. Under videos such as this. BTW your World War II analysis from earlier was very well put, perhaps the Germans would have lost anyway had we not interfered, however, when we look at historical records. It appears that is a possibility, but far from a certainty.
Of course it's really hard to make definitive statements about the outcome of WWII if things had happened differently. If Hitler had successfully invaded England, he would have surely won without US intervention.
On the other hand, it seems very likely that Japan would have successfully conquered the Pacific without US intervention, as we were the only other nation with a significant navy in the region.
@twk373 Thankfully I get the feeling there's more of us than them :-) as far as warfare is concerned will probably never know, after all we can only go by history but I feel history shows a necessity in US involvement, just my opinion. As far as left-wingers/libertarians are concerned, they just don't understand social issues. And that's their biggest downfall. I often ask them to name 25 things. Social conservatives have done in the last 25 years that affect their lives, none can answer.
Indeed. And, yeah, that's a great point about social issues. They are always wailing about how lefties want personal freedom but oppose economic freedom and how conservatives want economic freedom but oppose personal freedom. Really? I hate to break it to people, but conservatives are in favor of personal freedom.
@TheJoelef You really should not talk about the Constitution, after all, you're completely ignorant about what it truly stands for. Islam demands adherence to sharia law, sharia law is incompatible with the U.S. Constitution. The Constitution is not a suicide document, it was clearly never meant to be used as a tool to subvert itself or for allowing people to get away with horrific acts under the guise of freedom of speech/religion. Really, your understanding of constitutionality is childlike
Exactly right. My main problem with so many libs is they can't understand that there are very real threats to our freedom that--SHOCK!--exist outside the Federal government.
I have no interest in putting Congress back inside the Constitutional box only to have my grandchildren speaking Spanish and my great-grandchildren paying the jizzia.
@twk373 Exactly, people need to understand that just because something happened a certain way it's not a carbon copy of what's happening today. When people talk about immigrants they try to say that Mexican immigrants are no different than the Irish Jewish and a few others. When that's clearly not so. Those groups came here wanting to be Americans first, Mexicans crossed the border waiting the Mexican flag and talking about annexing California back to Mexico, not the same thing
@bigboss686 yep why were at it lets ban the WBC i mean they protest at soildiers funerals. Hey lets ban all marxist newpapers while were at it lets ban all neonazis parties. Afterall the only way to protect freedom is ban sppech and religionsthat you dont like. facism in the name of liberty.
We do, at any rate, need an updated Constitution with stronger protections against Federal power, third-world immigration, fantasy money, and a revised section on civil liberties which acknowledges how dangerous Islam is to freedom.
@TheJoelef LOL aren't you tired of making an ass of yourself yet? So according to you the government has a right to edit your religion, yet you are for freedom of religion? lmao that's one hell of a contradiction and makes you look like a complete bonehead. BTW a marriage certificate is essentially a government handouts certificate, if the state issues it to the state has a right to say who you can marry, after all. They're the one the privileges that go with the document
@TheJoelef well if that's the case then it shouldn't bother you, after all people who are trying to block homosexuals from giving marriage licenses aren't doing it because they don't like gays or trying to legislate morality, they're doing it to try to halt the expanse of governmental power. Don't you want smaller government?
It's because of bullshit like this that libertarians are nothing but irrelevant crackpots. The embargo was a direct reaction to the invasion of Kuwait and was authorized by the UN (not the US). To compare it to a direct suicide attack against civilians is insane. Libertarians are fine when they stick to the economy, but it's truly sickening to hear their foreign policy delusions. The fact that our foreign policy is shit justifies nothing. Stop pretending it does.
@seyhmusinci reply- just saw your post- i don't maean any disrespect-you sound like a good man-it's just that when a terrorist group uses the Muslim religion as justification,inspiration,and as a way to identify themselves--well-it's hard not to use the word Muslim identify them...
@mrbriscoe2001 They are Muslim. Saying otherwise is ignorant about what Islam truly says or lying. I suggest you go to Act4America to learn just what a pig religion Islam is. BTW if you want logical discussion you're wasting your time with the people that normally watch this, after all saying the US is responsible for deaths resulting from sanctions is as stupid as saying police are responsible for gang violence if they arrest a gang leader and there's a power vacuum that creates a gang war.
@TheJoelef LOL to you everywhere is, let me guess American Islamic Forum for Democracy is probably the same thing to you as well, right? What about the Koran, no doubt all the bad parts in it were secretly written by the Jews to make Muslims look bad, that about right you delusional boob?
Libertarian foreign policy is a joke, it basically amounts to trade with our enemies until they get strong enough to surround us, live and let live is a great policy, unless the other guy doesn't want to.
@TheJoelef Interesting contradiction, with this statement you essentially concede that you are incorrect about act4America and American Islamic forum for democracy as well as several other organizations speaking out against radical Islam. Then you offer a useless strategy of do-nothing and let our only real ally in the Middle East burn. Good old Ron Paul foreign-policy, throw your allies to the dogs then wait until you're surrounded and it's too late to fight because you're already dead.
@TheJoelef you know, if you have tried to at least make a logical argument. Then maybe someone could have taken you seriously, however with this snide stupidity on demonstration in the comment you just posted. You've proven your nothing but an anti-Semitic dipstick. Completely incapable of having a logical and rational discussion on the issue. But of course you didn't, because people like you can never have a grown-up discussion. As you only see things from your own narrowminded viewpoint.
@TheJoelef Freud said sometimes a cigar is just a cigar, if you don't want to be accused of being an anti-semi then don't act like one. I'm well aware people toss around accusations pointlessly these days, however that does NOT change the fact that that is what YOU ARE. As demonstrated by your own statements and actions. I know lots of people that disagree with being an ally/monetary trade or whatever with Israel, however, they have logical and reasonable arguments, unlike you.
@TheJoelef I know you're a complete buffoon, but you need to go into the dictionary and look up the word equivalencies. I didn't say you couldn't oppose Israel, oppose them all you like. Doesn't change the fact that you ARE an anti-Semite as is obvious from your comments. Rand paul recently spoke about rescinding foreign aid to Israel, he is without question NOT an anti-Semite because he uses a logical argument, again unlike you who just seems to be a bitter dummy.
@bigboss686 libertarians dont want to waste money and lives on stupid wars that have nothing to do with national security. We are not looking for OBL instead were building iraq and afghan roads and institutions when they cant even fix potholes down the street. Your right libertarian forein policy is joke compared to the world police israe; first neocons.
@TheJoelef And that's why libertarians will never gain, if it were up to libertarians we wouldn't even have gotten involved in World War II. Oh and don't forget that Ron Paul's foreign-policy would have Russia's nuclear ICBMs setting in Havana during the Bay of Pigs. To libertarians know war is ever justified, you seem to think you can get away with letting enemies surround you and outgun you, then try to fight back once it's already too late. What brilliant forward thinkers you are, dummy
@bigboss686 ww2 wasnt our problem. No if there an inteniment threat on our country then yes we should go to war. Iraq nor afghanistan was ever a threat to us.Libertarians want a smart foreign policy not being teh world policemen. Let those apatied ethnic cleasing israelis fight there own wars.
@TheJoelef LMAO you see is what you look like an idiot, World War II wasn't our problem? Do you really believe that if Hitler would have not been opposed by US forces and would have been able to completely take over England, France And also gaining all of their resources that there is any way in hell the US could have been victorious against such a massive stockpile of resources? if so you're completely brain-damaged. more soldiers/more weapons/more resources equals winner, you idiot
@TheJoelef Terrible argument, how would the US have been the victorious if Hitler had taken control of Europe, its resources and militaries in their entirety? Do share your brilliant strategy for winning war when your opponent has has a 1000 to one man advantage and soon after that nuclear weapons, should be good for a laugh.
BTW religious freedom and Islam cannot coexist, you're protecting a religion that says in order to get to heaven. You must beat women and stone gays to death
It's likely that Hitler would have ultimately been defeated without US intervention, and it's quite impossible that Hitler could have staged a successful invasion of the US.
@twk373 It is certainly possible, just as it's possible to throw 25 bull's-eye's in a row playing darts, however it's not likely. the simple fact is that most antiwar liberals/demented foreign-policy libertarians cannot understand the basics of warfare and how they relate to the real world. Sun Tzu and Minamoto Masashi understood that war between nations is similar to individual combat, if you wait until you're surrounded, you lose. BTW Excellent point on multiculturalism
If libertarians were not clueless on foreign policy, they would be much more accepted. Still, there is a lot of evidence that Hitler would have still lost without the US military response (although not without our aid). But that's just one example. I would have been in favor of the war at the time. I'm just saying, in hindsight, it might not have been necessary.
Your clueless foreign policy is that you think we should invite wave upon wave of third-worlders and Muslims into our country, while complaining that the US is somehow uniquely evil in its pointless wars.
Obviously there is no reason for us to be in Iraq or Afghanistan.
SouthernAvenger:gee ;they were UN sanctions,not US sanctions;secondly,what were the alternatives to sanctions?Lastly,Al Queda keeps changing it's rational fpr 911 so why believe anything they say?By the way more mosques blown up by the US or Al Queda insurgents in Iraq? Thank You.
Al-Qaeda has its own interests and hides behind the religion of Islam when it is on the run but they don't hesitate in killing Muslims and non-Muslims alike when they want to. Too bad Bush junior wasn't as charismatic and thoughtful in galvanizing Muslims to join the coalition of the willing like his father did when Saddam's forces had to be pushed out of Kuwait. Bush used vague and sometimes contentious terms like "You're either with us or against us" or "this is a crusade."
@wabdinur when 3000 people get slaughtered in 2 hours,it's time for "You're with Us or Against Us"--But you're right;he was not a great communicator-nor did he hold people accountable for the Iraq fiasco-specifically IMMEDIATELY firing Tenet when no WND's were found-because he didn't,he hurt America's credibility-"Iraq was all aboutoil" was confirmed for ,maybe-billions of people.I think Kennedy would have fired the CIA head if it turned out there were no nukes being assembled in
You guys keep up bringing up Reagan's providing weapons for Saddam as if to shock us. What does Reagan's stupidity have to do with our foreign policy today? If anything it's an argument for the U.S. to take responsibility for past administration's stupidity and bring down the monster, Reagan helped create. We are not arming dictators today but you bring up deals made in the 80s as if our generation is responsible. Sorry I was -1 years old when Reagan was put in office.
@Chay216 There is a continuity of foreign policy over the span of many administrations and many decades. And yes, we are arming dictators (and drug lords) today.
@argonium79 It's simple. Name one Dictator the U.S. is arming today. It would be nice to see facts for a change instead of all the diatribe people here spout.
@immayhem were funding the Taliban and paying private corporations to pay insurgents to attack our troops? hahahahaha You're fucking nuts. Stopping getting your news from Alex Jones. You sound like an idiot.
@Chay216 a simple google search would net you a number of articles which have appeared in various mainstream media news sources regarding the US arming/funding of the Taliban.
However, it's not worth debating someone whose only argumentative response is 'you're fucking nuts'. Google it. Or not.
@immayhem Yes we armed them in the 80s, everyone knows that. But to suggest we are fighting them right now and arming them currently as well is asinine. The question i was asking was what dictators are we arming TODAY, which noone has an answer to because we aren't. Clinton's administration was guilty of it but when it came to light we stopped supporting Indonesia because at the time it was run by a dictator. Believe it or not our system of government works pretty well. You are fucking nuts.
@Chay216 Ignorant fuckstain. ISI, Pakistan’s military-intelligence apparatus, which literally created and sponsored the Taliban and Al Qaeda, is directly upheld and funded by the CIA. These facts are not even in dispute, neither in the media nor in government. These facts were also recently highlighted by Pakistan President Asif Ali Zardari, who admitted that the CIA and his country’s ISI together created the Taliban and are still providing support.
@immayhem And ofcourse you equate that to the U.S. directly funding the Taliban and Al Qaeda? Were responsible for the corruptness going on in Pakistan? Both the Bush and Obama administration have confronted Pakistan regarding ISI while the Pakistan Military continue to deny association with the ISI. Have you any idea of what such a complex endeavor entails? No, you just simplify it to America funds the Taliban and Al Qaeda. Fuck off and get your simple minded comments off of here.
"Shut down morally and emotionally". That describes the author of this video very well. Any reasonably intelligent teenager will tell you that this lie about the Oil For Food crime is the fault of Sadamm Hussein and his gang of despots and that Madeline Halfbrite would go along with the lie is a matter I'll explain momentairily.
No excuse for either side but why can't these Muslim countries take care of their own? Blame America because of sanctions, well ok. Islamic countries to my knowledge have not contributed anything to the betterment of mankind but oil. That of which we showed them how to get.
I agree with the blow back theory that Ron Paul repeatedly states and Jack Hunter endorses. How ever the deaths in Iraq to civilians are as much on Saddam Hussein's and the Ba'ath head as they are on US foreign policy. The poor people of Iraq did suffer from malnutrition and lack of adequate medical provisions & care. But this was also while Saddam Hussein was buying crates of golden AK-47s & Dragonovs, Uday & Qusay Hussein were also buying exotic European sports cars and lived like Playboys.
Everyone really likes Ron Paul and there is nothing wrong with him but what really scares me about Ron Paul supporters is that they think the guy is perfect. He is not perfect and not realizing this creates a kind of cult personality around him.
@Voy2378 I don't like some of the things he said about 911 and the causes. That is really the only complaint about him that I have. I like the other things that he says about the constitution and non-interventionalist foriegn policy.
In that case I think that you should have a bigger problem with for example Giuliani who tried to gain cheap political points by attacking Paul when he said the truth. I understand that people can be sensitive about tragic events like 9/11 but still... I think that Paul did the right thing.
This is not a reasonable argument because the boycott of Iraq was not an Embargo. An Embargo is when you forcefully surround a country and deny people who want to trade with them entry into the country to trade. What we did was simply not trade with them in a peaceful attempt to remove make changes with the government. Countries do this all the time. We don't trade with Cuba. Does that make us responsible for their suffering? Shit like this is why libertarianism should get caned.
Google "top 10 things America has done for Muslims"
Guess the Avenger and the Imam missed these and only tried to find the bad stuff. Don't get me wrong: I'm a non-interventionist too--I hate our foreign policy, but I know which side the good will is on: I don't hear of Muslim nations saving tens of thousands of non-Muslims---or even other Muslims. And they call themselves "brothers"...please.
So I ask Jack a single question after listening to this uncharacteristically, yet, in this case, predictable bad posting: (Boy do myopic Libertarians fall into lock step).
Anyway, here's the question:
Just how does Red Herring taste and how do you like it prepared: grilled, broiled or pan fried-–or should I assume you like it raw, since you've dined on it this way in this posting?
Here is the real question for the west: How do you remain free when you permit those to enter who hold ideals that are diametrically opposed to Liberty, and whose intentions are not to assimilate as others have done, but to isolate, proselytize litigate & subjugate us to Islamic law and culture?
The analogous answer is: Allow termites to free run and your house will be destroyed.
Those who founded wester liberty knew this, but Jack seems logically and historically ignorant of the real issue.
Jack is letting his doctrinaire Libertarianism blind him.
1. Whose blood is on whose hands is a red herring: Saddam bears as much responsibility for the deaths of Iraqi children as anyone due to his policies.
2. The US has saved thousands of Muslims in natural disasters while Muslim nations did nothing.
The real issue
Wahabi Muslims are hegemonic. If Muslim history teaches one thing it teaches this: give them an inch and they'll take over--and force your daughter into a bourka.
The koran teaches that all infidels must be converted, enslaved or killed. It teaches that the infidel must be lied to concerning islams true intentions to do so if it advances islam. It teaches that earlier passages concerning peace and love are superseded by the later commands to wage war. These are polliticaly incorrect but easily verifiable FACTS. Read it in the koran. If a muslim tells you that islam is about peace and love, they were lied to, or are lying to you.
The Southern Avenger is a piece of crap. The sanctions were imposed by the UN in response to Iraq's invasion of Kuwait. Is this in any way the fault of Saddam? I'm sure those so quick to blame the US for everything don't think so. Don't forget that Saddam was pretty good at killing those innocent Muslims himself.
1. The US should have left eh UN a long time ago.
2. Saddam was rightly chased out of Kuwait. What exactly did we get for 10+ years of sanctions and hundreds of thousands of deaths?
3. Only ideologues "blames the US for everything", but then only an ideologue blames the US for nothing. Moral behavior demands introspection and a willingness to admit fault.
4. Yes he was; why does that justify our behavior? Are we trying to show him a better technique?
@tonman1964 It's very true that Saddam Hussein was the number one reason why the sanctions ended up killing more of his people -- he controlled all aid that came into Iraq and build lavish palaces while his own people suffered from the sanctions. But the fact remains that WE KNEW THIS, and LET IT HAPPEN, and chose to DO NOTHING. And don't forget that back in the 80's, the Reagan administration GAVE SADDAM MONEY AND WEAPONS so that he could wage war on Iran for 10 years, killing millions.
@MinstrelKrampf The most obvious question is why build one so big right there and why isn't the money coming from an American source? I think if this was an American Mosque then it would be less of a problem but it is being funded by foreign sources that we don't know about. These sources could have all sorts of idealogical motives that we are unaware of. Its like the KKK building a memorial right next the MLK's cemetary.
@timbosforporn (1) It's not big. It's a plain looking 5-story office building.
(2) It's NOT A MOSQUE.
(3) It's not near ground Zero. It's 5 blocks away. Have you ever walked 5 bocks in NYC? It's about 1/2 mile away from ground zero.
(4) Money has come from Americans. A Saudi Prince contributed the largest amount, but more money was raised from Muslims living in America -- The list of contributors is publicly available -- there are not mystrerious sources.
@timbosforporn The Imam who is building the community center (NOT A MOSQUE) worked for the Bush administration as a diplomat whose job was to bring Christians and Muslims together in peace and understanding. His "radical" comments were actually said by Both George W. Bush and Don Rumsfeld, but nobody called them anti-American when they said it. They both claimed that America was partly responsible for creating the atmosphere of enmity that exists between Muslims and the west.
that there may be a cover up of 911 is the most terrifying truth as it would shatter faith in our government and so we can't even mention it even though most members of the 911 commission now want another investigation
When I hear reports of the US being guilty of atrocities, it's not that I can't/won't believe it's true, it's more that I don't trust the source. I know it could be true but when you've been lied to for so long, and you know there's an anti-American agenda in place, it makes it hard to know who to believe and I don't want my sense of outrage and compassion used to jerk my head around for some propagandist reason. I also wouldn't put it past Iraq to kill its own people. Who to believe?
@Chay216 I thought you were insinuating that the government under Saddam was Islamic fundamentalist. I know that there are many religious people in Iraq.
@thecoolestbro What's wrong with believing in THE FACTS? All good journalism is about finding the facts. It's difficult to avoid truth when the facts are pointing the way. The worst source of truth is POLITICIANS, who always lie. Look at history. It's a fact that if the USA hadn't staged a coup in Iran back in 1959 (Operation Ajax), there never would have been a revolution there in 1977. in 1959, Iran was a pro-western democracy. We ended it and put a dictator in charge.
@thecoolestbro The 1959 coup that placed the shah in power happened because BP Oil (remember them? They seem to be at the heart of many disasters in the last 50 years) feared losing it's lucrative oil contract, because Iran was going to nationalize it's oil like the Saudis. BP couldn't get England to do anything, so it went to the US, and convinced us that there was a communist threat (in spite of the fact that Iran was a democracy). We placed the shah in power, and the people revolted in 1977.
okay, so you admit the US had plenty of blood on its hands and that our foreign policy is malevolent. So why WOULDN'T you think 9/11 was an inside job as well? Seems to me you're in the same state of denial you talked about in this video, Jack.
I actually think the more reasonable an argument is, the less Hannity comprehends it. When you spend that many years spewing neocon bullshit for a living, you forget how to be logical.
Right on Jack! Its too bad people like Hannity will not have you and others like you on to tell the truth about US foreign policy and the evil it produces. The blind nationalists and flag wavers are not patriotic, they are enablers of evil.
I probably lean more liberal than not and often find myself at odds with your videos, but it is videos like this that remind we why I suscribe to you. You are a great voice in politics, even when it challenges my views. I take what you say serious and to heart even if my initial reaction is of an opposing view, because you never seem to be coming from an ignorant standpoint. I am not conservative and I am not really Libertarian, but your opinion is still one I respect over most others.
Hannity is going to play quotes of you now Jack, on his radio show. It will be something completely rational and he'll just talk over it as though its bad. And his audience will now associate you with "Bad" BAD JACK! BAD!
Fox news is a joke,but what is not funny is that a lot of people believe in their crap.They're all making serious money right now,thanx to Obama and racism.
@ariespow Fox is making money not because of Obama and racism but because Fox's competition is even more lame than they are. Just like the people get the government they deserve they get the press they deserve as well.
Great video. A shame there's so many worthless (made so because of their inability to challenge their worldviews and learn from people who actually know what the hell they're talking about) neo-cons that seem to agree with Sean Hannity in this world, though.
Yeah but the U.S. dosent deliberately kill unarmed innocent woman and children.Terrorist attack weak people deliberately.Because they are cowards.Americans feel bad when they accidentally do it.The terrorists prefer to do it.If theres anyone who thinks.That soldiers like killing unarmed people.You are a completely worthless moron.
Talk about over-simplification. Only an idiot would think a death count was all that was needed to make a moral argument. Or one thing a stupid politician said to make a moral argument. The reason the sanctions happened was because of pacifists like the one who made this video who think war is wrong in all circumstances. If, however, the U.S. invaded Iraq during the Gulf War instead of imposing sanctions the death count would have been significantly less.
@Chay216 Ofcourse this video doesn't place any responsibility on Saddam Hussein for intercepting foreign aid to build his Palaces. If anyone thinks the U.S. is morally equivalant to Saddam who idolizes Stalin and has people executed if they crticize him or even spill something on his portrait, or compares them to AlQaeda who are edified to murder all "non-muslims" is too stupid to even be worth communicating with.
Libertarian at it's best can fix this
iwillspyonyou 10 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Read "the politically incorrect guide to Islam" the rest of books on islam r watered down and sugared up to attract converts = suckers or to convince gullible people to consider islam as just another misinterpreted peaceful religion. In Seville, Spain, locals stopped construction of another mosque by burying a pig on the site and made sure the news became know to the local media. Islamic law forbids erecting mosques on "pig soiled ground". The Muslims had to cancel the project outright.
jaxlnc 10 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
TheJoelef 1 year ago
Lets talk anout senitivity. Bombing and killing innocent people in a country that never attack on false pretense and then put up a huge embassy the size of vatican city in there war ravaged capitol. Then we can take a poll see how many of teh citizens support it.
TheJoelef 1 year ago
@TheJoelef
You're talking about 9/11 and the victory mosque, right? Yeah, most citizens don't support it.
twk373 1 year ago
@twk373 no i wa talking about the large embassy in the bagdad green zone.
TheJoelef 1 year ago
@twk373 most citizens hate property rights.
TheJoelef 1 year ago
@TheJoelef
So why do you care about the opinions of Iraqis?
twk373 1 year ago
Comment removed
Sockfaces 1 year ago
what the dakota indians of teh dakota conflict terrorist?
TheJoelef 1 year ago
And the damn muslims can build a mosque at Ground Zero when christians can build a church anywhere in any muslim country.
twk373 1 year ago
@twk373 yep ignore our constitution.
TheJoelef 1 year ago
@TheJoelef
The Constitution does not protect Muslims.
twk373 1 year ago 2
@twk373 yes our constitution dosent say anything about religious freedom.
TheJoelef 1 year ago
@TheJoelef
The Constitution protects us from totalitarian political systems like Islam.
twk373 1 year ago
@twk373 you love the constitution...unless it someone you dont like liek muslims.
TheJoelef 1 year ago
@twk373 our constitution protects all americans even KKK, WBC, Nazis, Communist.
TheJoelef 1 year ago
@TheJoelef
The Constitution protects us from Islam.
twk373 1 year ago
@twk373 it protects freedom of religion which apparently you abhore.
TheJoelef 1 year ago
@TheJoelef
Islam is primarily a totalitarian political system hellbent on world domination.
twk373 1 year ago
@twk373 just kie they said about the soviets/communist, japanese and germans. Wake me up when you neocons have another boogeyman
TheJoelef 1 year ago
@TheJoelef
If only we could ship all you stupid libs off to Iran. Multiculturalism doesn't work when you're importing people who hate freedom. Idiot.
twk373 1 year ago
@twk373 i dont like multicuturalism either. I just dont tink we should violate our constitution liek your advocating.
TheJoelef 1 year ago
@TheJoelef
The Constitution was written in a time when almost everyone in America was a Christian, Muslims were irrelevant desert shepherds, and poisonous ideologies like Marxism had not even been invented.
If you had suggested at the time that the 1st Amendment protects African cannibalism, Muslim totalitarianism, Mayan human sacrifice, or even Mormon polygamy, you would have just been laughed at.
twk373 1 year ago
@twk373 I think this guy is just trolling, after all no one could be this stupid LOL
Islam demands adherence to sharia law, which means if you didn't allow Muslims to beat their wives, girlfriends mothers or stone homosexuals to death than your violating their freedom of religion by not allowing them to.
Judging by how dumb joelef is he probably has a a lot of animosity build up towards his mother, since he lives in her basement He probably likes the idea of that.
bigboss686 1 year ago
@bigboss686
Maybe he's trolling, but he's really just reflecting what Jack Hunter said in the above video. Hunter, Paul, etc. are great...I just wish they would wise up when it comes to alien cultures and Islam.
twk373 1 year ago
@twk373 polygamy should be legalized. and those practices wee banned not the entire religion.
TheJoelef 1 year ago
@TheJoelef
Why the fuck should polygamy be legal?
And yeah, if we could take every objectionable part of Islam and ban it, then that would be fine. Of course, you'd have to ban like 90% of it.
twk373 1 year ago
@twk373 because its not the government job to decide who marry and who we cant.
TheJoelef 1 year ago
@TheJoelef
If you want to "marry" multiple women, you really should move to Iran.
twk373 1 year ago
@twk373 the government job is not to promote moraillty is suppose to protect freedom like freedom of religion which everyone seems to hate on here.
TheJoelef 1 year ago
@TheJoelef
The only person who hates the freedom of religion is you, because you want Muslims to come here, take over, and remove our freedom of religion.
twk373 1 year ago
@twk373 yoyu want to do the same thing except to muslims.
TheJoelef 1 year ago
@TheJoelef
That's as stupid as saying that it's wrong to limit the ability of congress to control our lives. Oh noes, you're trampling on the congressmens' freedom to screw us!
Sorry, but Christians and Jews are peaceful. They are not trying to interfere with anyone. Muslims, like statists, will never be satisfied until every aspect of your life is under their control.
twk373 1 year ago
@twk373 yep we siad the same exact things about the germans, japanese and communist. this whole "red under the bed" crap is getting pretty old
TheJoelef 1 year ago
@TheJoelef
Um, we were right about the communists, retard. How the hell can you pretend to be a libertarian who's supposedly against the expansion of federal power without understanding that communists cum progressives cum leftists are behind it all? If we had effectively resisted the American communists of the early 20th century, we would have none of these problems today.
You can only maintain ideological freedom if you aggressively resist totalitarian ideologies.
twk373 1 year ago
@twk373 i think having should have free speech. making people take loyality oaths and mccarthyism was violation of covil liberities. I hate communism but they still have freedom of speeech in this country.
TheJoelef 1 year ago
@TheJoelef
Of course they have freedom of speech. The problem is not that they "have" freedom of speech, but that THEY exercise it, while WE do not. For every stupid communist ranting about the labor theory of value, there should be a thousand conservatives calmly explaining that his economics are bullshit. Unfortunately, people like you sat back and let the communists infiltrate every sector of the government and education system, and now you wonder how we got in this mess. Lol.
twk373 1 year ago
@twk373 agreed however you want to ban there free speech just liek you want to bna freedom of religion .
TheJoelef 1 year ago
@TheJoelef Well, it appears you were far from finished making an ass of yourself LOL
Look, no one is denying Islamic freedom of religion, their own religion possessing values making it incompatible with the laws of the Constitution is what obstructs it. Freedom of religion doesn't give you the right to mutilate animals, beat women or kill gay's. Just as freedom of speech doesn't give you the right to threaten murder and several other things, your knowledge of the Constitution is beyond pitiful
bigboss686 1 year ago
@twk373 you want to ban free speech and freedom of religion which is totaltarism to fight people banning free speech and religion. Hyprocracy at its finest.
TheJoelef 1 year ago
@twk373 I must admit it's refreshingly nice to speak with someone intelligent in regards to these issues. Under videos such as this. BTW your World War II analysis from earlier was very well put, perhaps the Germans would have lost anyway had we not interfered, however, when we look at historical records. It appears that is a possibility, but far from a certainty.
bigboss686 1 year ago
@bigboss686
There are a few of us out there. :-)
Of course it's really hard to make definitive statements about the outcome of WWII if things had happened differently. If Hitler had successfully invaded England, he would have surely won without US intervention.
On the other hand, it seems very likely that Japan would have successfully conquered the Pacific without US intervention, as we were the only other nation with a significant navy in the region.
twk373 1 year ago
@twk373 Thankfully I get the feeling there's more of us than them :-) as far as warfare is concerned will probably never know, after all we can only go by history but I feel history shows a necessity in US involvement, just my opinion. As far as left-wingers/libertarians are concerned, they just don't understand social issues. And that's their biggest downfall. I often ask them to name 25 things. Social conservatives have done in the last 25 years that affect their lives, none can answer.
bigboss686 1 year ago
@bigboss686
Indeed. And, yeah, that's a great point about social issues. They are always wailing about how lefties want personal freedom but oppose economic freedom and how conservatives want economic freedom but oppose personal freedom. Really? I hate to break it to people, but conservatives are in favor of personal freedom.
twk373 1 year ago
@TheJoelef You really should not talk about the Constitution, after all, you're completely ignorant about what it truly stands for. Islam demands adherence to sharia law, sharia law is incompatible with the U.S. Constitution. The Constitution is not a suicide document, it was clearly never meant to be used as a tool to subvert itself or for allowing people to get away with horrific acts under the guise of freedom of speech/religion. Really, your understanding of constitutionality is childlike
bigboss686 1 year ago
@bigboss686
Exactly right. My main problem with so many libs is they can't understand that there are very real threats to our freedom that--SHOCK!--exist outside the Federal government.
I have no interest in putting Congress back inside the Constitutional box only to have my grandchildren speaking Spanish and my great-grandchildren paying the jizzia.
twk373 1 year ago
@twk373 Exactly, people need to understand that just because something happened a certain way it's not a carbon copy of what's happening today. When people talk about immigrants they try to say that Mexican immigrants are no different than the Irish Jewish and a few others. When that's clearly not so. Those groups came here wanting to be Americans first, Mexicans crossed the border waiting the Mexican flag and talking about annexing California back to Mexico, not the same thing
bigboss686 1 year ago
@bigboss686 yes we shouldnt allow tenets within shariah law but going to a msqqu on fridays shouldnt be banned.
TheJoelef 1 year ago
@bigboss686 no your just not trying to look like a liberty hating hyprocrite.
TheJoelef 1 year ago
@bigboss686 yep why were at it lets ban the WBC i mean they protest at soildiers funerals. Hey lets ban all marxist newpapers while were at it lets ban all neonazis parties. Afterall the only way to protect freedom is ban sppech and religionsthat you dont like. facism in the name of liberty.
TheJoelef 1 year ago
@TheJoelef
We do, at any rate, need an updated Constitution with stronger protections against Federal power, third-world immigration, fantasy money, and a revised section on civil liberties which acknowledges how dangerous Islam is to freedom.
twk373 1 year ago
@twk373 having teh goevrnment ban religion is the federal power.
TheJoelef 1 year ago
@TheJoelef LOL aren't you tired of making an ass of yourself yet? So according to you the government has a right to edit your religion, yet you are for freedom of religion? lmao that's one hell of a contradiction and makes you look like a complete bonehead. BTW a marriage certificate is essentially a government handouts certificate, if the state issues it to the state has a right to say who you can marry, after all. They're the one the privileges that go with the document
bigboss686 1 year ago
@bigboss686 i think the government shouldnt be involved with marriageperiod. It nothing more then a big government entitlement program.
TheJoelef 1 year ago
@TheJoelef well if that's the case then it shouldn't bother you, after all people who are trying to block homosexuals from giving marriage licenses aren't doing it because they don't like gays or trying to legislate morality, they're doing it to try to halt the expanse of governmental power. Don't you want smaller government?
bigboss686 1 year ago
@bigboss686 yes we shouldnt give marraige lincenses to agys or straights. Government shouldnt be sanctioning any typ=e of marriage.
TheJoelef 1 year ago
It's because of bullshit like this that libertarians are nothing but irrelevant crackpots. The embargo was a direct reaction to the invasion of Kuwait and was authorized by the UN (not the US). To compare it to a direct suicide attack against civilians is insane. Libertarians are fine when they stick to the economy, but it's truly sickening to hear their foreign policy delusions. The fact that our foreign policy is shit justifies nothing. Stop pretending it does.
twk373 1 year ago
@seyhmusinci reply- just saw your post- i don't maean any disrespect-you sound like a good man-it's just that when a terrorist group uses the Muslim religion as justification,inspiration,and as a way to identify themselves--well-it's hard not to use the word Muslim identify them...
mrbriscoe2001 1 year ago
@mrbriscoe2001 They are Muslim. Saying otherwise is ignorant about what Islam truly says or lying. I suggest you go to Act4America to learn just what a pig religion Islam is. BTW if you want logical discussion you're wasting your time with the people that normally watch this, after all saying the US is responsible for deaths resulting from sanctions is as stupid as saying police are responsible for gang violence if they arrest a gang leader and there's a power vacuum that creates a gang war.
bigboss686 1 year ago 2
@bigboss686 of they doact4america is just a bunch of pro israel garbage.
TheJoelef 1 year ago
@TheJoelef LOL to you everywhere is, let me guess American Islamic Forum for Democracy is probably the same thing to you as well, right? What about the Koran, no doubt all the bad parts in it were secretly written by the Jews to make Muslims look bad, that about right you delusional boob?
Libertarian foreign policy is a joke, it basically amounts to trade with our enemies until they get strong enough to surround us, live and let live is a great policy, unless the other guy doesn't want to.
bigboss686 1 year ago
@bigboss686 nope i just dont want to waste our tax payer money and lives on fighting wars for israel.
TheJoelef 1 year ago
@TheJoelef Interesting contradiction, with this statement you essentially concede that you are incorrect about act4America and American Islamic forum for democracy as well as several other organizations speaking out against radical Islam. Then you offer a useless strategy of do-nothing and let our only real ally in the Middle East burn. Good old Ron Paul foreign-policy, throw your allies to the dogs then wait until you're surrounded and it's too late to fight because you're already dead.
bigboss686 1 year ago
@bigboss686 israel an ally? HAHAHA
TheJoelef 1 year ago
@TheJoelef you know, if you have tried to at least make a logical argument. Then maybe someone could have taken you seriously, however with this snide stupidity on demonstration in the comment you just posted. You've proven your nothing but an anti-Semitic dipstick. Completely incapable of having a logical and rational discussion on the issue. But of course you didn't, because people like you can never have a grown-up discussion. As you only see things from your own narrowminded viewpoint.
bigboss686 1 year ago
@bigboss686 ahh the liberal anti semite card. Just as bad as the liberal race card.
TheJoelef 1 year ago
@TheJoelef Freud said sometimes a cigar is just a cigar, if you don't want to be accused of being an anti-semi then don't act like one. I'm well aware people toss around accusations pointlessly these days, however that does NOT change the fact that that is what YOU ARE. As demonstrated by your own statements and actions. I know lots of people that disagree with being an ally/monetary trade or whatever with Israel, however, they have logical and reasonable arguments, unlike you.
bigboss686 1 year ago
@bigboss686 so critizing israel is an anti-semetic? i guess i must be a racist to since i oppose welfare and illegal immigration.
TheJoelef 1 year ago
@TheJoelef I know you're a complete buffoon, but you need to go into the dictionary and look up the word equivalencies. I didn't say you couldn't oppose Israel, oppose them all you like. Doesn't change the fact that you ARE an anti-Semite as is obvious from your comments. Rand paul recently spoke about rescinding foreign aid to Israel, he is without question NOT an anti-Semite because he uses a logical argument, again unlike you who just seems to be a bitter dummy.
bigboss686 1 year ago
@bigboss686 what does hell did i say was anti semitic ?
TheJoelef 1 year ago
@bigboss686 libertarians dont want to waste money and lives on stupid wars that have nothing to do with national security. We are not looking for OBL instead were building iraq and afghan roads and institutions when they cant even fix potholes down the street. Your right libertarian forein policy is joke compared to the world police israe; first neocons.
TheJoelef 1 year ago
@TheJoelef And that's why libertarians will never gain, if it were up to libertarians we wouldn't even have gotten involved in World War II. Oh and don't forget that Ron Paul's foreign-policy would have Russia's nuclear ICBMs setting in Havana during the Bay of Pigs. To libertarians know war is ever justified, you seem to think you can get away with letting enemies surround you and outgun you, then try to fight back once it's already too late. What brilliant forward thinkers you are, dummy
bigboss686 1 year ago
@bigboss686 ww2 wasnt our problem. No if there an inteniment threat on our country then yes we should go to war. Iraq nor afghanistan was ever a threat to us.Libertarians want a smart foreign policy not being teh world policemen. Let those apatied ethnic cleasing israelis fight there own wars.
TheJoelef 1 year ago
@TheJoelef LMAO you see is what you look like an idiot, World War II wasn't our problem? Do you really believe that if Hitler would have not been opposed by US forces and would have been able to completely take over England, France And also gaining all of their resources that there is any way in hell the US could have been victorious against such a massive stockpile of resources? if so you're completely brain-damaged. more soldiers/more weapons/more resources equals winner, you idiot
bigboss686 1 year ago
@bigboss686 last i time i reember england and france were independence soveirgn on the otehrside of the world.
TheJoelef 1 year ago
@TheJoelef Terrible argument, how would the US have been the victorious if Hitler had taken control of Europe, its resources and militaries in their entirety? Do share your brilliant strategy for winning war when your opponent has has a 1000 to one man advantage and soon after that nuclear weapons, should be good for a laugh.
BTW religious freedom and Islam cannot coexist, you're protecting a religion that says in order to get to heaven. You must beat women and stone gays to death
bigboss686 1 year ago
@bigboss686
It's likely that Hitler would have ultimately been defeated without US intervention, and it's quite impossible that Hitler could have staged a successful invasion of the US.
twk373 1 year ago
@twk373 It is certainly possible, just as it's possible to throw 25 bull's-eye's in a row playing darts, however it's not likely. the simple fact is that most antiwar liberals/demented foreign-policy libertarians cannot understand the basics of warfare and how they relate to the real world. Sun Tzu and Minamoto Masashi understood that war between nations is similar to individual combat, if you wait until you're surrounded, you lose. BTW Excellent point on multiculturalism
bigboss686 1 year ago
@bigboss686
If libertarians were not clueless on foreign policy, they would be much more accepted. Still, there is a lot of evidence that Hitler would have still lost without the US military response (although not without our aid). But that's just one example. I would have been in favor of the war at the time. I'm just saying, in hindsight, it might not have been necessary.
twk373 1 year ago
@twk373 yiur right not being the world policeman and fighting wars that have nothing to do with national security is a clueless foreign policy
TheJoelef 1 year ago
@TheJoelef
Your clueless foreign policy is that you think we should invite wave upon wave of third-worlders and Muslims into our country, while complaining that the US is somehow uniquely evil in its pointless wars.
Obviously there is no reason for us to be in Iraq or Afghanistan.
twk373 1 year ago
SouthernAvenger:gee ;they were UN sanctions,not US sanctions;secondly,what were the alternatives to sanctions?Lastly,Al Queda keeps changing it's rational fpr 911 so why believe anything they say?By the way more mosques blown up by the US or Al Queda insurgents in Iraq? Thank You.
mrbriscoe2001 1 year ago
@mrbriscoe2001
Al-Qaeda has its own interests and hides behind the religion of Islam when it is on the run but they don't hesitate in killing Muslims and non-Muslims alike when they want to. Too bad Bush junior wasn't as charismatic and thoughtful in galvanizing Muslims to join the coalition of the willing like his father did when Saddam's forces had to be pushed out of Kuwait. Bush used vague and sometimes contentious terms like "You're either with us or against us" or "this is a crusade."
wabdinur 1 year ago
@wabdinur when 3000 people get slaughtered in 2 hours,it's time for "You're with Us or Against Us"--But you're right;he was not a great communicator-nor did he hold people accountable for the Iraq fiasco-specifically IMMEDIATELY firing Tenet when no WND's were found-because he didn't,he hurt America's credibility-"Iraq was all aboutoil" was confirmed for ,maybe-billions of people.I think Kennedy would have fired the CIA head if it turned out there were no nukes being assembled in
mrbriscoe2001 1 year ago
man, you hit a home run on this one. I revere you and your open eyes! the rabbit hole goes deeper though with manufactured terror.
tyrannyresponseteam1 1 year ago
man, you hit a home run on this one. I revere you and your open eyes!
tyrannyresponseteam1 1 year ago
I just found your channel. You're incredible, man. I agree with you 100%. Wow.
crubeo 1 year ago
so your for the mosque >: ?
Greatwhiteninja123 1 year ago
You guys keep up bringing up Reagan's providing weapons for Saddam as if to shock us. What does Reagan's stupidity have to do with our foreign policy today? If anything it's an argument for the U.S. to take responsibility for past administration's stupidity and bring down the monster, Reagan helped create. We are not arming dictators today but you bring up deals made in the 80s as if our generation is responsible. Sorry I was -1 years old when Reagan was put in office.
Chay216 1 year ago
@Chay216 There is a continuity of foreign policy over the span of many administrations and many decades. And yes, we are arming dictators (and drug lords) today.
Reagan was an actor.
immayhem 1 year ago
Comment removed
Chay216 1 year ago
@immayhem We are arming dictators today? Name one.
Chay216 1 year ago
@Chay216 what the hell, freakin half of africa is currently being armed by the USA
argonium79 1 year ago
@argonium79 It's simple. Name one Dictator the U.S. is arming today. It would be nice to see facts for a change instead of all the diatribe people here spout.
Chay216 1 year ago
@Chay216 this is a list of official aid which also include some un-democratic countries like saudi arabia
newamerica(.)net/publications/policy/u_s_weapons_war_2008_0
i do not like to bother writing all the bunch of warlords all over the world which are funded inofficially, you gonna deny it anyway
argonium79 1 year ago
@Chay216 US is funding the Taliban, for one.
Our government is paying private corporations to pay insurgents to attack our troops.
Nothing new. That's how it works. That's the game.
As former CIA Station Chief John Stockwell explained: “Enemies are necessary for the wheels of the U.S. military machine to turn.”
(... and therefore, the wheel of state.)
immayhem 1 year ago
@immayhem US (and other countries) are supplying arms to Congolese rebel warlords.
immayhem 1 year ago
@immayhem were funding the Taliban and paying private corporations to pay insurgents to attack our troops? hahahahaha You're fucking nuts. Stopping getting your news from Alex Jones. You sound like an idiot.
Chay216 1 year ago
@Chay216 a simple google search would net you a number of articles which have appeared in various mainstream media news sources regarding the US arming/funding of the Taliban.
However, it's not worth debating someone whose only argumentative response is 'you're fucking nuts'. Google it. Or not.
immayhem 1 year ago
Comment removed
Chay216 1 year ago
@immayhem Yes we armed them in the 80s, everyone knows that. But to suggest we are fighting them right now and arming them currently as well is asinine. The question i was asking was what dictators are we arming TODAY, which noone has an answer to because we aren't. Clinton's administration was guilty of it but when it came to light we stopped supporting Indonesia because at the time it was run by a dictator. Believe it or not our system of government works pretty well. You are fucking nuts.
Chay216 1 year ago
@Chay216 Ignorant fuckstain. ISI, Pakistan’s military-intelligence apparatus, which literally created and sponsored the Taliban and Al Qaeda, is directly upheld and funded by the CIA. These facts are not even in dispute, neither in the media nor in government. These facts were also recently highlighted by Pakistan President Asif Ali Zardari, who admitted that the CIA and his country’s ISI together created the Taliban and are still providing support.
immayhem 1 year ago
@immayhem And ofcourse you equate that to the U.S. directly funding the Taliban and Al Qaeda? Were responsible for the corruptness going on in Pakistan? Both the Bush and Obama administration have confronted Pakistan regarding ISI while the Pakistan Military continue to deny association with the ISI. Have you any idea of what such a complex endeavor entails? No, you just simplify it to America funds the Taliban and Al Qaeda. Fuck off and get your simple minded comments off of here.
Chay216 1 year ago
@immayhem Our complicated relationship with Pakistan is a far cry from the Reagan administration directly funding the Taliban and Saddam.
Chay216 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
"1955: You can sit on the bus, just not THERE.
2010: You can build a Mosque, just not THERE."
key1116 1 year ago
@TheCrookedTimber Good point.
nomadak47 1 year ago
"Shut down morally and emotionally". That describes the author of this video very well. Any reasonably intelligent teenager will tell you that this lie about the Oil For Food crime is the fault of Sadamm Hussein and his gang of despots and that Madeline Halfbrite would go along with the lie is a matter I'll explain momentairily.
MMouthPeach 1 year ago
You need to get that podcast going, SA.
Vindrewski 1 year ago
No excuse for either side but why can't these Muslim countries take care of their own? Blame America because of sanctions, well ok. Islamic countries to my knowledge have not contributed anything to the betterment of mankind but oil. That of which we showed them how to get.
nomadak47 1 year ago
I agree with the blow back theory that Ron Paul repeatedly states and Jack Hunter endorses. How ever the deaths in Iraq to civilians are as much on Saddam Hussein's and the Ba'ath head as they are on US foreign policy. The poor people of Iraq did suffer from malnutrition and lack of adequate medical provisions & care. But this was also while Saddam Hussein was buying crates of golden AK-47s & Dragonovs, Uday & Qusay Hussein were also buying exotic European sports cars and lived like Playboys.
BradNC11175 1 year ago
Everyone really likes Ron Paul and there is nothing wrong with him but what really scares me about Ron Paul supporters is that they think the guy is perfect. He is not perfect and not realizing this creates a kind of cult personality around him.
timbosforporn 1 year ago
@timbosforporn
Can you name one big problem that you have with Paul? I never claimed that he is perfect, but I don't have any big problems with his policies.
Voy2378 1 year ago
@Voy2378 I don't like some of the things he said about 911 and the causes. That is really the only complaint about him that I have. I like the other things that he says about the constitution and non-interventionalist foriegn policy.
timbosforporn 1 year ago
@timbosforporn
You don't like that he said those things or you think those things are not true?
Voy2378 1 year ago
@Voy2378 The fact that he said them.
timbosforporn 1 year ago
@timbosforporn
In that case I think that you should have a bigger problem with for example Giuliani who tried to gain cheap political points by attacking Paul when he said the truth. I understand that people can be sensitive about tragic events like 9/11 but still... I think that Paul did the right thing.
Voy2378 1 year ago
This is not a reasonable argument because the boycott of Iraq was not an Embargo. An Embargo is when you forcefully surround a country and deny people who want to trade with them entry into the country to trade. What we did was simply not trade with them in a peaceful attempt to remove make changes with the government. Countries do this all the time. We don't trade with Cuba. Does that make us responsible for their suffering? Shit like this is why libertarianism should get caned.
timbosforporn 1 year ago
Google "top 10 things America has done for Muslims"
Guess the Avenger and the Imam missed these and only tried to find the bad stuff. Don't get me wrong: I'm a non-interventionist too--I hate our foreign policy, but I know which side the good will is on: I don't hear of Muslim nations saving tens of thousands of non-Muslims---or even other Muslims. And they call themselves "brothers"...please.
billyboy647 1 year ago
So I ask Jack a single question after listening to this uncharacteristically, yet, in this case, predictable bad posting: (Boy do myopic Libertarians fall into lock step).
Anyway, here's the question:
Just how does Red Herring taste and how do you like it prepared: grilled, broiled or pan fried-–or should I assume you like it raw, since you've dined on it this way in this posting?
billyboy647 1 year ago
Most people are still unaware that the US propped up Saddam when a lot of his own people wanted him lynched.
Mattboy2388 1 year ago
Here is the real question for the west: How do you remain free when you permit those to enter who hold ideals that are diametrically opposed to Liberty, and whose intentions are not to assimilate as others have done, but to isolate, proselytize litigate & subjugate us to Islamic law and culture?
The analogous answer is: Allow termites to free run and your house will be destroyed.
Those who founded wester liberty knew this, but Jack seems logically and historically ignorant of the real issue.
billyboy647 1 year ago
Jack is letting his doctrinaire Libertarianism blind him.
1. Whose blood is on whose hands is a red herring: Saddam bears as much responsibility for the deaths of Iraqi children as anyone due to his policies.
2. The US has saved thousands of Muslims in natural disasters while Muslim nations did nothing.
The real issue
Wahabi Muslims are hegemonic. If Muslim history teaches one thing it teaches this: give them an inch and they'll take over--and force your daughter into a bourka.
billyboy647 1 year ago
hannity is a schill plain and simple...
Xenthoid 1 year ago
southern avenger you should mention in your videos that US is funding the terro...I mean freedom fighters that fight against the Iran government.
Voy2378 1 year ago
Comment removed
leestauf 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
The koran teaches that all infidels must be converted, enslaved or killed. It teaches that the infidel must be lied to concerning islams true intentions to do so if it advances islam. It teaches that earlier passages concerning peace and love are superseded by the later commands to wage war. These are polliticaly incorrect but easily verifiable FACTS. Read it in the koran. If a muslim tells you that islam is about peace and love, they were lied to, or are lying to you.
leestauf 1 year ago
The Southern Avenger is a piece of crap. The sanctions were imposed by the UN in response to Iraq's invasion of Kuwait. Is this in any way the fault of Saddam? I'm sure those so quick to blame the US for everything don't think so. Don't forget that Saddam was pretty good at killing those innocent Muslims himself.
tonman1964 1 year ago
@tonman1964
1. The US should have left eh UN a long time ago.
2. Saddam was rightly chased out of Kuwait. What exactly did we get for 10+ years of sanctions and hundreds of thousands of deaths?
3. Only ideologues "blames the US for everything", but then only an ideologue blames the US for nothing. Moral behavior demands introspection and a willingness to admit fault.
4. Yes he was; why does that justify our behavior? Are we trying to show him a better technique?
032125 1 year ago
@tonman1964 I agree with this comment. This is why libertarianism will get squashed when they make comments like this.
timbosforporn 1 year ago
@tonman1964 It's very true that Saddam Hussein was the number one reason why the sanctions ended up killing more of his people -- he controlled all aid that came into Iraq and build lavish palaces while his own people suffered from the sanctions. But the fact remains that WE KNEW THIS, and LET IT HAPPEN, and chose to DO NOTHING. And don't forget that back in the 80's, the Reagan administration GAVE SADDAM MONEY AND WEAPONS so that he could wage war on Iran for 10 years, killing millions.
MinstrelKrampf 1 year ago
Other facts that conservative blow-hards like Hannity and O'Reilly get totally wrong:
(1) It's not a mosque. It's a neighborhood center with basket ball & Tennis courts, and a Culinary school.
(2) It's not near Ground Zero. It's 5 blocks away. You can't see it from ground zero.
(3) Ground Zero is currently being turned into a Memorial park with trees & monuments.
(4) Major funding for the Islamic center came from a Saudi prince, who is also a financial supporter of FOX NEWS. Ironic?
MinstrelKrampf 1 year ago
@MinstrelKrampf The most obvious question is why build one so big right there and why isn't the money coming from an American source? I think if this was an American Mosque then it would be less of a problem but it is being funded by foreign sources that we don't know about. These sources could have all sorts of idealogical motives that we are unaware of. Its like the KKK building a memorial right next the MLK's cemetary.
timbosforporn 1 year ago
@timbosforporn (1) It's not big. It's a plain looking 5-story office building.
(2) It's NOT A MOSQUE.
(3) It's not near ground Zero. It's 5 blocks away. Have you ever walked 5 bocks in NYC? It's about 1/2 mile away from ground zero.
(4) Money has come from Americans. A Saudi Prince contributed the largest amount, but more money was raised from Muslims living in America -- The list of contributors is publicly available -- there are not mystrerious sources.
(5) It's not a mosque.
MinstrelKrampf 1 year ago
@timbosforporn The Imam who is building the community center (NOT A MOSQUE) worked for the Bush administration as a diplomat whose job was to bring Christians and Muslims together in peace and understanding. His "radical" comments were actually said by Both George W. Bush and Don Rumsfeld, but nobody called them anti-American when they said it. They both claimed that America was partly responsible for creating the atmosphere of enmity that exists between Muslims and the west.
MinstrelKrampf 1 year ago
@MinstrelKrampf
@ (4)
watch?v=XN1MR99_kSE
Voy2378 1 year ago
that there may be a cover up of 911 is the most terrifying truth as it would shatter faith in our government and so we can't even mention it even though most members of the 911 commission now want another investigation
norm741 1 year ago
Southern Avenger FTW!
ronpaulkid 1 year ago 6
Excellent, excellent video.
ShiaAfghan 1 year ago
When I hear reports of the US being guilty of atrocities, it's not that I can't/won't believe it's true, it's more that I don't trust the source. I know it could be true but when you've been lied to for so long, and you know there's an anti-American agenda in place, it makes it hard to know who to believe and I don't want my sense of outrage and compassion used to jerk my head around for some propagandist reason. I also wouldn't put it past Iraq to kill its own people. Who to believe?
thecoolestbro 1 year ago
Comment removed
Chay216 1 year ago
@Chay216 I thought you were insinuating that the government under Saddam was Islamic fundamentalist. I know that there are many religious people in Iraq.
rhfyr91 1 year ago
@thecoolestbro What's wrong with believing in THE FACTS? All good journalism is about finding the facts. It's difficult to avoid truth when the facts are pointing the way. The worst source of truth is POLITICIANS, who always lie. Look at history. It's a fact that if the USA hadn't staged a coup in Iran back in 1959 (Operation Ajax), there never would have been a revolution there in 1977. in 1959, Iran was a pro-western democracy. We ended it and put a dictator in charge.
MinstrelKrampf 1 year ago
@thecoolestbro The 1959 coup that placed the shah in power happened because BP Oil (remember them? They seem to be at the heart of many disasters in the last 50 years) feared losing it's lucrative oil contract, because Iran was going to nationalize it's oil like the Saudis. BP couldn't get England to do anything, so it went to the US, and convinced us that there was a communist threat (in spite of the fact that Iran was a democracy). We placed the shah in power, and the people revolted in 1977.
MinstrelKrampf 1 year ago
okay, so you admit the US had plenty of blood on its hands and that our foreign policy is malevolent. So why WOULDN'T you think 9/11 was an inside job as well? Seems to me you're in the same state of denial you talked about in this video, Jack.
Chad9976 1 year ago
I actually think the more reasonable an argument is, the less Hannity comprehends it. When you spend that many years spewing neocon bullshit for a living, you forget how to be logical.
badtown88 1 year ago 2
Right on Jack! Its too bad people like Hannity will not have you and others like you on to tell the truth about US foreign policy and the evil it produces. The blind nationalists and flag wavers are not patriotic, they are enablers of evil.
66605 1 year ago
I probably lean more liberal than not and often find myself at odds with your videos, but it is videos like this that remind we why I suscribe to you. You are a great voice in politics, even when it challenges my views. I take what you say serious and to heart even if my initial reaction is of an opposing view, because you never seem to be coming from an ignorant standpoint. I am not conservative and I am not really Libertarian, but your opinion is still one I respect over most others.
zpt4xzpt4x 1 year ago 2
Hannity is going to play quotes of you now Jack, on his radio show. It will be something completely rational and he'll just talk over it as though its bad. And his audience will now associate you with "Bad" BAD JACK! BAD!
soundgarden21 1 year ago
Good stuff.
Also, props to Ron Paul that "Islam" did not attack us on 9/11, so o
n0us3rn4m3s4v41l4bl3 1 year ago
Fox News should instead use their time to focus on the warmongering jews and neo cons who are itching to start WWIII with Iran.
wijse 1 year ago
Fox news is a joke,but what is not funny is that a lot of people believe in their crap.They're all making serious money right now,thanx to Obama and racism.
ariespow 1 year ago
@ariespow Fox is making money not because of Obama and racism but because Fox's competition is even more lame than they are. Just like the people get the government they deserve they get the press they deserve as well.
vipero00 1 year ago 2
Boy this is painfully true
TheTravisChannel 1 year ago
Great video. A shame there's so many worthless (made so because of their inability to challenge their worldviews and learn from people who actually know what the hell they're talking about) neo-cons that seem to agree with Sean Hannity in this world, though.
kinginsomniac 1 year ago
@southernavenger can you post a link to the statistic of 500,000+children killed please?
Tom
soicuw 1 year ago
@soicuw try this one, but understand the difficulty in measuring the true impact of such policies:
try thenation domain "article/hard-look-iraq-sanctions"
teeowe 1 year ago
Comment removed
argonium79 1 year ago
@soicuw wikipedia "iraqi sanctions"
argonium79 1 year ago
Yeah but the U.S. dosent deliberately kill unarmed innocent woman and children.Terrorist attack weak people deliberately.Because they are cowards.Americans feel bad when they accidentally do it.The terrorists prefer to do it.If theres anyone who thinks.That soldiers like killing unarmed people.You are a completely worthless moron.
wastelandsoldier1 1 year ago
@wastelandsoldier1
Sure they do. Those sanctions OBVIOUSLY would hurt Iraq. Madeline Albrite even said "It was worth it">...
TheMango121 1 year ago
@wastelandsoldier1 ....none of which changes anything.
Mattboy2388 1 year ago
Amen to the SouthernAvanger!
ZilverGalacticon 1 year ago
Talk about over-simplification. Only an idiot would think a death count was all that was needed to make a moral argument. Or one thing a stupid politician said to make a moral argument. The reason the sanctions happened was because of pacifists like the one who made this video who think war is wrong in all circumstances. If, however, the U.S. invaded Iraq during the Gulf War instead of imposing sanctions the death count would have been significantly less.
Chay216 1 year ago
@Chay216 Ofcourse this video doesn't place any responsibility on Saddam Hussein for intercepting foreign aid to build his Palaces. If anyone thinks the U.S. is morally equivalant to Saddam who idolizes Stalin and has people executed if they crticize him or even spill something on his portrait, or compares them to AlQaeda who are edified to murder all "non-muslims" is too stupid to even be worth communicating with.
Chay216 1 year ago