Freedom's Watch is a Washington D.C. based 501(c)(4) lobbying organization. Freedom's Watch is supportive of the Bush administration's positions in the War on Terror and of Republican Congressional candidates. The group is run and supported, in part, by several former officials of the Bush administration. In the 2008 election cycle, Freedom's Watch purchased advertisements in support of Republican congressional candidates. Buttholes!
Freedoms Watch was co-founded and funded by Mel Sembler, who was involved with the forged CIA documents, which Bush used in his State of the Union address. Sembler is the man behind the curtain for Freedom Watch's spin machine. FR also has Karl Rove as a paid consultant. FR is a 401c4 organization to give the appearance that they are an independent organization. In reality, they are an extension of Karl Roves dirty tricks media operation. Ignore EVERYTHING FR SAYS!!! It is mostly Propaganda!!!
This groups leader, brad Blakman opposes the new GI Bill. yea right he supports the troops. This group is nothing but war profiteers and their neocon puppets.
I see the moronic comments and asking answered or stupid questions is still a tactic of the extreme left as if it didn't demean their own positions and intellect. No wonder they hide as trolls.
There are even a few rooting against troops and advocating that we let our nation be destroyed with all it's people to become martyrs. If that really worked, then why not kill themselves in protest of things, anything. They can kill themslves and I'll see if it changes my mind.
If what they said is a lie wouldn't they be subjected to lawsuits? Please define what exactly "victory" in Iraq means? When will it come? At what cost? How many more Americans have to die to achieve it? Didn't Bush declare "victory" five years ago on that aircraft carrier?
The "mission" was going to war, not winning the war? By that standard Adolf Hitler achieved "mission accomplished" on June 22 1941 when he went to war with the USSR! Of course it ended in ruin for him and Germany. The "mission" kept changing? No. What kept changing was their need to come up with a false justification when the Causus Belli - WMD - turned out to be a bust.
How about calling on congress to condemn Rush Limbaugh for calling any soldier against the war "phony soldiers". Who gives a shit about Petreaus? He's not fighting the battles, and he aint no Eisenhower or Macarthur. So you fascist cocksuckers at Freedoms watch can burn in hell for eternity. You are a radical reactionary group.
Who does this ad appeal to? The voice over is so weak, it sounds ike he is ready to cry. And the message is so far removed from reality that it is absurd on it's face.
America and the Forces of Freedom are winning? LMAO - are they like the Fantastic Four?
US INVADED:Mexican troops murdered former Rio Bravo mayor, a US federal legislator and 4 others US federal agents yesterday, Jan.8th, on US soil. OUR Federal agents prevented local reporters from accessing the scene, roughing up photographers and threatening others with arrest.DEMAND EXPLANATIONS! USELESS SENATORS, MAYORS & GOVERNORS MAKE USELESS PRESIDENTS! KNOW--B4 U VOTE
Mad, I say VERY MAD props to the voice work on that ad. Did you hear the quivering, the vindication...the fear? That guy did an excellent job. That was some seriously tight propaganda.
I am sorry but Generals have a hard time telling the truth to the Commander in Cheif. He became a mouth piece of the GOP and they paraded him out like a piece of meat. Look at General Powell the GOP used him and then pact him aside like an old car. This General along with other Generals let young men and women go to jail when they knew that the orders for Abu Ghraib came from the office of Rummy. Not one General stood up for these soldiers.
I think the thing that MoveOn is forgetting is that General Petraeus isn't a politician, he's a military general. Let me repeat...a general. The man has worked his ass off to get to where he has gotten and it's an extremely honorable, prestigous position. To say that he has betrayed us? That's a little strong. No general has anything but America's interests in mind. He's not a politician. We don't treat him like a politician.
Hopefully this will describe my point a lot better. We've all had teachers that we know didn't like us. Teachers that didn't like us hated to give us good grades. They hated to recognize and reward our effort and our success. This is sort of the same thing. MoveOn hates the idea of people fighting for a common good, and they refuse to recognize, and certainly reward, their efforts and their accomplishments.
No move on and others need to point out the truth others beside yourself really want to hear all sides. You on the other hand are just like a mushroom sit in the dark and get fed shit
How so? MoveOn hates the idea of people who continue to fight for a lie, with a lie, under a band of liars, and a lot of Americans feel that way. The lie they fight for is "stability in the region", when they're really there for plunder.The lie they fight with is "freedom", "liberation", and a "victory". The liars they serve are the Bush administration and the right wing.
1) When you get up in front of the American people and lie to them with a straight face, your rank, status, and achievements don't matter. If you actually read the ad and looked at the sources posted on the moveon page, you'd see that almost everything he said was a fabrication. So what if he's a general? Just because he has a position of authority doesn't mean that he's immune from criticism and can do no wrong.
I never said that he's not immune from criticism and can't do wrong. Show me where I said that? Liberals always stretch and twist the words of conservatives and take them too far. Saying that Petraeus is betraying the American people is way too strong. Does MoveOn have a better candidate for his position?
"I think the thing that MoveOn is forgetting is that General Petraeus isn't a politician, he's a military general. Let me repeat...a general. The man has worked his ass off to get to where he has gotten and it's an extremely honorable, prestigous position. To say that he has betrayed us? That's a little strong."
That's exactly what you said. So what should they say? He sold out American lives and our livelihood at home for a lie and a dollar.
My point is, it doesn't matter who the general was, MoveOn hates Republicans, they hate the military, they've got something against good guys fighting bad guys (don't like the military, don't like cops, etc.), and they think that if we win this war that the Republicans have won and the Democrats have lost. Republicans don't look at it like that. It's not a political matter.
Bullshit. If it's not political, why do they ignore domestic issues (save for taxcuts for the rich and denying healthcare)to promote the "War on Terror" at every debate, on every network, every newspaper, and every ad. Why do ads like this exist? A public service? The only thing that can come out of this war is defeat, dead soldiers, wounded soldiers,dead civilians, and a wounder American image aroudn the world. It cannot be won.
That comment has no base. How did he allow himself to be paraded. He said that the military situation in Iraq is going well but the political situation isn't. Weren't there like 18 goals or something? He said we only had about half of them down. How is that being a meat puppet for the president? Even John Murtha has admitted we're doing well militarily in Iraq.
Tell me, what is victory, in your opinion. How can we win a war against an "enemy" that gains new recruits for every second the US military remains on their soil? How can we win a war against foes who can't be distinguished from civilians? How can we win when there is no stable government, and no infrastructure?
Stop and think, instead of spitting out nationalistic phrases. Wake up. I feel sorry for people like you, really, I do.
we dont need to "support" the troops wen need to get them the fuck out of iraq, this freedom watch is a pile of bullshit, this war has no point other than to raise oil prices and all of you that are to stubborn to realize the truth, you should be the ones fighting in iraq, you should feel the pain that these men and women have felt. then maby you will realize how bad and pointless this war is, then maby you will get respet not only from me, but from the world.
How will "winning" help anyone? Do you know what "winning" does to a soldier?
Have you ever noticed that a soldier will tell you almost anything...except about the times he's killed people?
Think about that. Hell, my grandfather didn't even see combat in England, and he NEVER talked about those things. This is not a game. You don't get a prize for winning.
What you get for winning is FREEDOM, why don't people get that? There are people who are using Islam to kill thousands of people. More people died on 9/11/2007 than have died in the Iraq war! The terrorist want to follow us home and kill our families. Our soldiers that have been captured by them have to listen to Hillary Clinton while being tortured!
Follow us home and kill our families." You're so afraid of a suicide bomber that you'd have otherwise good men fly B52 bombers to go blow up other people's families. You don't care whose children die so long as you feel good about your own safety. You don't care how many people lose their freedom, as long as you have yours.
"More people died on 9/11/2007 than have died in the Iraq war!" Wrong. More AMERICANS have died - or are Iraqis not people? Nobody knows how many Iraqis we've killed.
I feel sorry for you and McCain. McCain lost my repect when he allowed this president to call his wife a drunk and drug addict and did nothing. They don't want to follow us home that is the brain washing that you have allowed your small brain to except. Any torture would be another 4 years of this GOP and the new war in Iran. I am sure that you think we can kill them all. Bomb them back to the stone ages. You are just like Olbermann said the other night the blind leading the blind.
first of all, i never hear republicans making personal attacks on liberals like saying blind leading blind, small brain etc, etc. And isn't it Barack Obama that said he will consider military action against Iran if he is President?
Win what? You win a war by surrender or absolute defeat of the "enemy". The Iraqi insurgents are not a nation-we can't bring them to surrender. The more you kill, the more angry their constituents will be. The only way you can win in that way is genocide, which some chickenhawk right wingers seriously support. The "War on Terror" can never be won. It's just an excuse for an eternal war to benefit corporate interests, spread empire and create an oligarchy in the US.
An irrelevant conservative organization called "Freedom's Watch", supported by Newt Gingrich (of all people), wants to "watch" a more successful and influential organization called "Move On", and condemn them for utilizing their "Freedom" of Speech?
A commercial network, such as NBC, has every right to refuse service to anyone. Read the sign. Just like the sane and respectful refuse to watch FOX News. You are a joke.
Republian comlaining of charges betrayal and name calling? that's the only way they get elected. since 2001 anyone who said a word against the President and his wars, was a traitor.
Any 'War on Terror' is a war not meant to be won. Propaganda rousers like this make me want to vomit copious amounts of bile upon Gen. Petraeus' living room couch.
Hasn't being "anti-war" lost it's "trendy" factor yet? Good night, how long can these people spout the same "no war for oil" "Bush lied American's died" etc crap before it becomes "old"?
Conservative enough to create the highest deficits in our history? Yeah, that's real conservative. Conservative doesn't mean anything anymore, except for "Gays can't marry, abortions should be illegal, and we'll send billions of dollars in weapons to foreign countries that support our "interests"". Yeah, conservative is just a goddamn word.
Madeness, that has to be in the top 10 most ignorant statements I have ever read. Keep spouting brainless cliches, it makes everyone else look smarter.
it's wrong to fight against tyranny? Fuck that, I'd rather be a patriot and be hated for it than be a neocon and take pride in destroying the constitution.
MoveOn is WINNING, because more Americans are refusing to swallow the jingoisting war-mongering lies of the fascist right wing and their loyal propaganda units like this "Freedoms Watch." Petraeus did betray us. Bush and the rest of his criminal enterprise betrayed us long ago. Power to the people!
If not, try to acknowledge that politicians of all slants make power plays if they need to. Under that context, examine unanimously approving Petraeus and then immediately questioning his reliability... then how about bi-partisanly approving a war they would gain back power by decrying??
Betrayal, pssh... Petraeus is SAVING us - we just finished the lowest month of civilian/US casualties in 2 years (after a steady decline for last 5-6 months) by his strategies... if that's what traitors do we need more of them.
If the U.S. undertakes military action against Iran, you can credit such longtime neoconservatives as Norman Podhoretz, William Kristol, Michael Ledeen and the right wing think tanks. You can also credit Pastor John Hagee and his Christians United for Israel, a Christian Zionist outfit with unbending support for Israel. And credit also the billionaire and multimillionaire founders of Freedom's Watch for helping smooth the way. They will all be cheering from under their beds.
And yet another hate-filled, liberal talking head explodes into a cloud of rage and hate for our military, gov't, and country in general. Can anyone out there who is/was a service member please tell me what the name of the class was that taught us to intentionally "slaughter hundreds of Innocent civilians?" I must have missed that course during basic training.
It's the one you took only in the mind of a liberal. In the building next to where John Kerry learned to raze villages in a fashion reminiscent of Genghis Khan.
What a F**cking Joke. Do you even know what it is like to go into a village and slaughter hundreds of Innocent civilians. That is what this war does. Oh and by the way, you obviously did not get the memo....there was never any connection to 911 and Iraq thus the war on terror is in Afghanistan. Dumb ass.
Really, it's what this war does? The only thing I ever did to hundreds of innocent civilians at a time was hand out school supplies, toys, radios, and water. Something tells me that's not synonymous with 'slaughter.'
And nobody ever claimed there was a 9/11 connection. But Saddam was a terrorism supporter. And by the time Saddam was ousted, Al Qaeda was there... so it's always been part of the War on Terror as well.
Dude...The bullshit connection between Saddam and 9/11 was a huge part of the propaganda to get us into this thing. Sadam was a scumbag military dictator which also made him an enemy of Al-Qaeda.
Negative. No such connection was ever drawn, that was purely an assumption by ill-informed constituents. All that Bush ever said was that Saddam had links to terrorism, which he did. (It's not called the "Global War on Al Qaeda")
And FYI several of such anti-Israeli terrorists that Saddam was linked to, AQ was linked to as well. Although AQ seeks to overthrow or accumulate all governments of muslim countries, they at least shared a few contacts and a few goals.
Saddam was a secular, totalitarian ruler who did not tolerate religious fundamentalists. Al Quaeda did not gain a foothold in Iraq precisely because Saddam considered them an enemy and a threat to his grip on power.
Actually, look at say, history of women's rights in Iraq and you can see that he at least reached out to fundamentalists when it was in his interests. At first women were relatively free under Saddam, but he cracked down on it like a good little islamist.
And there were terrorists living under his roof that were tacitly (most) and implicityly (Zarqawi) linked to AQ.
Zarqawi stayed in the north, out of Saddam's reach. Saddam would have killed him if he had an opportunity, something Bush and Cheney prevented the Pentagon form doing several times.
Except when he was travelling to Basra to meet people on the border there. Or when he was injured on the way and holed up for months (with his whole "crew") at a hospital in Baghdad. In either case, we never said it was a "war on Al Qaeda" so the dangerous people were not limited to Zarqawi and Abu Nidal and the rest with AQ 'links'- the terrorists Saddam definitively funded or supported are terrorists too.
Hear that? A "go back to" from a liberal. I thought that was for those that are racist but also exclusively conservative. Oh well.
Sometimes Cubans make better Americans than democrats. They've seen what the far left and big government can do, while spoiled Americans complain about how unfair our comparatively spectacular society is.
Castro dying and shit shaking up on it's own is not miraculous, it's very likely.
I'm all for fighting for one's country, but historically you're usually between a rock and a hard place without foreign aid for your revolution.
That and many Cubans I knew in the Army would say "America is my country", and they certainly act it. Second only to Vietnamese in commie-hating, and being red-white-and-blue to the bone.
On a side note, ariak (since I'm always confused about you neo-con fascist conspiracy types)...
Was Bill Clinton part of this supposed fascist movement too, or did he spend so much time in office worrying about islamofascists because he just really likes Bush + co.?
First, it's not rage so much as joining up to solve a difficult problem. Rage has no place in defeating people who grew up indoctrinated- their madrasas are a better target of rage.
Second, it's not misplaced. See this brings me back to Bush's biggest mistake in the war on terror - using fear and talking points to justify himself instead of educating the masses...
...He could have spent all that time telling people that islamofascists have used terrorism against us for decades as a means to an end to overthrow more moderate governments in the mideast and make a powerful caliphate to force others under shariah law, but he wasted that time oversimplifying it- "they hate our freedom." And you rightfully were skeptical. Not too late to learn the real deal though... try reading Shadow War or Losing Bin Laden by Richard Miniter.
... also, the senate knew Petraeus would be called upon to report what he finds in Iraq to congress- speculation that he was a partisan shill was addressed then, and he was unanimously approved.
So was Gonzolas. laughable eh? So was FEMA director Brown. Just because an ineffectual congress gives these people a free pass, does not mean they are great for the job. Not one right winger has addressed the fudging of the numbers as reported by the WAPO or the fact that Petraeus is arming both sides of the Iraqi civil war.
But those were ordinary positions at the time, where only competence was a concern.
Petraeus was voted unanimously on when it was already known that he would be called back from the theater to report to an upset congress on the progress.
Petraeus himself adressed the claim of arming militias- he said we don't. That matches my experiences in Iraq and Afghanistan- the only people I've ever seen receive weapons from us are those countries' respective governments.
He also addressed Ethno-Secarian Violence (ESV) methodology. It is not fudging the numbers, it is a long-standing methodology (developed first by the CIA and DIA) that was criticized by WAPO. Nobody was bitching when the same methodology showed a sharp increase in 2006, but now they complain when it's good news.
The WAPO article apparently wasn't fact checked, since the SOP is unclasified (next comment), and contains such powerful un-names sources such as "a senior official".
The article is misleading to the point of lies- here is the methodology SOP. It's very simple, and a "shot anywhere in the head" is considered an execution.
qando dot net/uploads/images/ESV%20methodology dot pdf
Admiral William Fallon, chief of central command, derided Petraeus as a sycophant. Fallon told Petraeus that he considered him to be "an ass kissing little chickenshit" and added "hate people like that".
Fallon is merely a talking point that proves you don't have to tow the line for Bush to appoint you.
He's not had the boots-on-ground experience, his forte' is Navy fighter pilot, and he has fundamental disagreements about this war with the guy who literally wrote the book on counterinsurgency. Which one would you trust?
This ad shamefully and dishonestly refers to terms like 'victory and 'surrender is not an option.' That is sick, twisted propaganda. It's an occupation. Furthermore, civilian command policies (Bremer's CPA and Rumsfeld's light boots on the ground model) have made the prospect of a successful occupation IMPOSSIBLE. What sort of sick civilian command asks soldiers to carry out an impossible mission?
Ahh/...... freedom of speech goes both ways... something liberals seem to forget. They think that becuase you are "free" to say something that it makes what your are saying right. Or they think that others cannot use thier free speech to speak out against what liberals say.
Don't conuse the legal right to say something, with being right in what you say.
Here is the thing you dont understand. Freedom of speech is not being able to say things with impunity. It being able to say things knowing that there are those that may have a different opinion who may criticise your ideas. No one is criticising free speach, but the ideas that are spoken.
fuck anyone who wastes time talking about our war.
3,000 people died in 9/11. people act like that was a big deal.
places like africa have over 30,000 people dieing a DAY from starvation alone. thats ten 9/11's every day for africans. cigarettes, drugs, cancer, POLLUTION. the list of death tolls from these things separately all dwarf this little war."
Apparently people dislike my earlier comment a great deal. Anyone care to actually address it?
When some asshole comes to your house and kills somebody you love, don't bother asking the police for help because it's no big deal- they're better of quitting the force to help cure cancer, since your family member was just one little person.
your warping the argument. im not talking about longshot things, just simple things. conserving resources. donating a few dollars to the starving DIRECTLY saves laves.
in order to put it into proper terms, you have to say if said police quit the force they WILL cure cancer and save millions, and then yes they should ignore my family member.
Vet223: Juxtaposing irrelevant set of discourses to draw an obscure conclusion wouldn't get you far in life. You don't even care about your own neighbor being screwed over by the mortgage company, getting evicted, and losing his entire livelihood, now you want to tell everyone you have "feelings" for people you've never met? Apathy, that's what America is about. 9/11 is just another excuse for a credulous moron like you to bitch about something.
That's exactly what I was criticizing HIM for... 9/11 was no big deal because famine still exists? What kind of shit is that? Famine has always existed and it doesn't negate anything else I feel is important, nor our right to self defense or reactionary preventive intervention.
Who the fuck are you to tell me who I don't care about? I lose sleep over the Iraqis I met exactly once, because for some we may be about to abandon them for the third time.
It's always about "us" vs. "them" mentality, isn't it? Next time try to think around it in a global scale; there is no you, there is no me, there is "everyone." You have more than two brain cells, try to rob them against each other time to time. If famine is minimized, there would be less uneducated, oppressed, impoverished people who wouldn't follow a religious ideology. If you can't see our policies are channeling the world destruction, then all hopes are lost.
You might as well stick to your mindless wrestling, urine-flavored beer, and roasted peanuts for your misplaced rage. You stop your fucking charade on Iraqi sympathy and think about half a dozen "mega-bases," which cost $2 Billion/each, and mega-embassy that's going to house 5-8k personals and God knows how many security staff. With such sheer magnitude of construction on top of the oil fields, you go ponder about our permanent stay for the next 80 years. Now go leak your imaginary wounds.
Lol, another stereotypical US-bashing... euro, is it?
1. Since all Americans like fake wrestling, all Europeans are lazy fucks who won't fix my AC with any degree of efficiency in the middle of an Italian August.
2. I don't drink American beer, and it does taste like piss - hefeweizen and belgian stuff for me.
3. Who gives a shit how big a base is, when the US Army's goals are to hand them over to Iraqis as efficiently as possible? We're not there for their oil, and we're not there to personally run security for 80 years. Every goal we tried to meet while I was there contradicted those supposed goals.
See what happens when you don't finish your high school? You cannot even put a cohesive set of ideas together; what the fuck are you blathering about?
Ya, so you want to tell me why the United States of America is building 6-10 mega-bases on the oil fields of another sovereign country IF they are "planning" to wrap up their humanitarian invasion in the next few years? Oh, so now you claiming we have a goal?
It is a cohesive set of ideas- I responded to two of your baseless accusations about me, and third, your asinine ideas about the goals of the US Army in Iraq.
Because we blew up most of the Iraqis' old bases? Just a guess. Do you think if this were about securing the oil ourselves far into the future we would be spending billions on training Iraqi military and police as quickly as possible? ...
... Don't you think if this were about oil we'd have actually reduced the price we're paying for it by now, shortly before America is likely to put a defeatocrat in power?
We've always had a very clear goal, as most soldiers can tell you. Not that we don't love hearing liberals complain that we don't know why we're there.
"Because we blew up most of the Iraqis' old bases?"
There were no bases to begin with; they all were demolished in the 90's. This is a clear indication that you don't even read the responses throughly. You can go juggle with your 4th-grade education on how oil has nothing to do with this war. Have you taken a look at the petroleum laws being passed in Iraq? I guess not.
"Don't you think if this were about oil we'd have actually reduced the price we're paying for it by now"
Haha, gotta love it when these dope heads getting vaccinated with GED[F-]. It's not about your or my interest -- it's what "they" going to put in their pockets. No wonder Americans are getting fist fucked every day and in return they apologize for being too tight. The profits are being reaped somewhere else, you are being walked on as we speak.
Wail on your gratuitous failed assumptions -- I am not even liberal. But it's typical of you hillbillies to fire up a "liberal" bashing machine guns out of utter despondent so you can feel good about your amputated mind set.
"The US Army has a realistic system for classifying enemy combatants."
Oh boy, realism and military never go hand in hand. The affairs in this war are being conducted by a bunch of 20-something-year-old's who can't even pull their own shit out. From your response it's clear that there is NO Al-Quaeda anywhere except in your hysterical ill-prepared responses and imaginary boogie-men flashed on your TV screen. Go leak your fancied wounds.
"You've literally not read a thing that characters like UBL and Zawahiri"
I am smart enough not to buy into state sponsored "celebrity" brouhaha of some barefooted fundamentalist and millions like him -- we got a lot of them in this country; let's do something about them first. And you are getting hotter; bankers but drop the Jewish stereotype -- you may end up in a solitary confinement for the rest of your life.
It's entertaining (and sad if you have apathy for this world) when media announces a junkie operating in some corner of the world, planning to poke the "freedom" in the eyes. With all these "Al-Quaeda" minions all over place, you want to tell us, no one, not even the CIA knew about these guys before hand? People just don't grow out of the ground, you know. But then again, in capitalism you can bullshit any factual fallacies and spoon feed it to people as you please.
"the doctors and other educated people with money and bright futures who join him"
Oh ya? name 100 "doctors" who are _directly_ working for UBL. You say they are "everywhere," right? Let's see what you got. How many did you strangle with you bare hands?
"Saudi Arabia is a fairly rich country by most accounts"
Next time do your fucking research before regurgitating every piece of crap you happen to hear. Saudi Arabia's GDP per capita was $8500 last year which ranks somewhere in or around 100th in the world. No only that, the wealth is dispersed disproportionally. In either case, why don't we attack them instead? Isn't it funny any sort of "ally" we've had throughout the years has turned against the U.S.?
Isn't it a bit odd that the absence of U.S. presence in any country is pretty much correlated with privation of "terrorism?" That gets you thinking: Maybe... MAYBE the U.S. is a catalyst to all the terror in this world? Isn't that swell...
Nope. Before all that there was Israel, and we and the British were accused of intervening to help Israel against the Arab countries before we actually were (scapegoat for getting their asses kicked). The colony-taking euros had more to do with that, but you can't go through life blaming people for WWII era faults. Then of course Russia did their part to turn some against us during the cold war as well. Funny how things work out.
Actually it's over 15,000 according to the IMF and it's in the 40's. Above Poland and way above Russia, at a glance. Where are all the Russian terrorists, if money's so important?
A good sentiment about attacking them, right now they give good intel and appease us, but it's sick that they produce brainwashed IF's too. Eventually they'll be on the problem list if we haven't changed them through actions elsewhere in the region (the plan).
Even you should be able to see THAT logical fallacy- you name 100 PEOPLE who are _directly_ working for him!
The fact that even the trigger-men in the last western attack were well educated, is enough food for thought.
And I never said they are everywhere, either.
But in any case, you're the one making the claim- what evidence do you have that poverty is a principle cause of terrorism? (be wary about the correlation vs causation fallacy, since you're about to commit it)
And yet another idiotic claim from you, that I said anything about us not knowing about them beforehand. Clinton said over and over again he was worried about UBL and AQ, but average joe was too ignorant and content to follow him.
"In capitalism" bwahaha, yes you are a liberal my friend. What is it you think, authoritative control over all industries, the media included, is going to better inform us? Silly commie.
I see. You're SMART enough to know nothing about the guys who ordered fellow citizens killed by the thousands. How keen of you. But... how can you claim it's state sponsored propaganda if you admittedly don't pay attention?
And barefooted? Did you miss that last conversation? These guys wear sandals, and many could afford golden ones. You're sitting here trying to dismiss or belittle the people behind the most dangerous ideas in the world right now.
What the hell would you know about the military? What you learned from movies? I'm not saying I never saw bureaucratic messes in my 4 years, but those assessments are realistic. If what you say is true and everybody is called Al Qaeda, why would an infantryman like myself bother knowing the acronyms ACM and AQAM? It's not like I had to lighten things up for the media, that's for talking internally to other soldiers.
Really. Anarchist then? If not I'm so sorry... who'd have thought, someone thinks 9/11 was no big deal and assumes the worst from the US military, that isn't a far left loon.
FYI I bash social conservatives just as much, being that I'm neo-libertarian.
By who, the Iraqis? Their oil is selling as high too, are they getting rich and laughing at us? and **American oil companies are buying at what now, 70?** I thought Bush was an old oil tycoon's chrony, what's up? He gets criticized for exporting democracy so why not privatize the national oil reserves in 2003 when he had that power?
In either case, we know that was something they lacked- are you suggesting the Iraqi army shouldn't have any?
Yes, I have seen the petroleum laws that have been brought up, almost 5 years after an early period of having total political control of Iraq, including the one SHOT DOWN BY THE IRAQI PARLIAMENT. So keep juggling your conspiracy theories, America is so evil we MUST be there to oppress and rob them.
Vet223: I am not that lucky or else I wouldn't have a disease-minded cockroach like you in this country. And don't bring your puffed up "rage" of everyday life deficiency here -- no one cares if you got fucked in the shower by an Italian guy this morning while belching like a viking god.
I don't see any rage here, short of your vitriol and ad hominem. I started off in this thread by calmly responding that 9/11 is in fact a "big deal" despite worldwide constants such as poverty... then you showed up and started slinging baseless insults... so, 'rage boy', 'projecting' any? Got some life deficiency of your own?
Hah, that's a laugh. Yeah, watch out for those uneducated, oppressed, DOCTORS, led by the most fervent theocrat of them all, UBL, who was BORN WITH A SILVER SPOON IN HIS MOUTH.
If you have two brain cells to rub together, I suggest you actually research Al-Qaeda, and the expansionist islamic fascist (/totalitarian) movement. In order to understand this situation you have to understand them, and it's not so cut and dry as to claim they'd be fine if they just had money.
You dumb-witted cunt, your analogies suck and your silence is blessing. What the fuck does Osama have to do with the point I brought up? You seem like keep losing track of what we are discussing here. You said famine is not as important as 9/11 and I argued, alleviating the economical status of a society would leave fewer uneducated people to end up being some fundamentalist cohort.
Of course, you can turn the attention to the U.S. and observe its ignominious stain of imperialism despite its population literacy (or perhaps all the EU and Asia are laughing at my latter assessment).
Al-quaeda is another phrase for neo-fascism by ultra-nationalistic sanguinary elements and credulous jar-heads like you, designed to mask its imperialistic agenda and indoctrinated ethically approved excuse to fuck up the world.
The only thing I need to know is whether your mom is suing a sperm that got her impregnated with you or not. It's apparent that every single living organism on this planet is considered to be a part of the Al-Qaeda network, right? Next year, you wouldn't be surprised to hear an insane claim of a woman who postulates on Fox Nazi News her kittie's death was to be blamed on UBL.
Tell me, how many "Al-Qaeda" soldiers did you guys actually capture? Or was it just every insurgency or "opposition" militia automatically being labeled as Al-Qaeda these days?
Ahh, my favorite kind of uninformed liberal anti-military accusations... the annoyingly predictable.
The US Army has a realistic system for classifying enemy combatants. AQ is only called such when we can actually confirm a connection to AQ mid-to-upper level leadership. Anybody without...
... Anybody without the connections can at most get AQAM (Al Qaeda Affiliated Militia) if they claim solidarity, ACM (Anti Coalition Militia) if they are basically independent. Bigger independents get their own name, like the Mahdi Army, Baath party, Taliban, etc.
Oh I realize that, I never said ALL liberals are anything. Many are not anti-military, and I would assume you are not either. But lately accusations have been thrown around, in the media and here in this thread. Besides the one assuming the worst at every step, there's the other guy, who simply started off with "fuck the troops." So blame them, because I didn't really go so far as to generalize or stereotype.
So you expect people reading to believe Al-Qaeda is some neocon fantasy or overblown 1984 enemy that will go away if we throw money at it, is that right? You've literally not read a thing that characters like UBL and Zawahiri have said, have you? Been under a rock for the last 30 years of incremental warfare we've been trying to hard to not think about? Oh no I know, you think 12 jewish bankers run the world and this is just a plot to keep Israel afloat?
"fundamentalist cohort" has everything to do with UBL. More importantly though, the doctors and other educated people with money and bright futures who join him. Terrorism is not a financial crime, and the link between poverty and terrorism is extremely weak, compared to other crime. Saudi Arabia is a fairly rich country by most accounts and there are more brainwashing madrasas there than anywhere else. This is NOT that simple a problem.
Here's another thought, The US military command in Africa provides roughly half of all medical and food aid in the Horn of Africa. And it has been the job of the US military commanders to minimize the number of US causualties in Iraq by pushing for body armor and up-armored vehicles.
Google: (Guns, not roses, for Iraq) and read the Salon story about Petreus and arms sales to Iraq. He's supplying the very guns which will shoot our troops as well as the ones that he was in charge of in 2004 that came up missing. There is more to this thing than flag wavers care to think about.
He is supplying weapons to a coalition of Sunni paramilitary organizations under the payroll of the Iraqi government and the direct command of the ISF.
Also, be warned, many of the pro Freedom's watch comments are done by the same people with multiple accounts. Freedom's Watch is headed by former Bush Adminstration toady Bradley Blakemen. A google search of the group will reveil who thier millionaire contributors are.
More shameless propoganda by a Bush mouthpiece organisation. The Washington post explained in great detail how Petreus fudged his numbers and his history of supporting Administration claims. Enough is enough
Also Freedom's Watch is not a Bush mouthpiece organization (z not s-I will not always be here to correct you're spelling, go back to elementary english instead of rolling doobies in your van down by the river). So far Bush has done everything he could do unknowingly to lose this war-only now with Gen Petraeus are we really winning. Thanks to Bush, Rumsfeld, and Abizaid 2003 to 2006 have been essentially a holding action.
Sorry that my spelling irked you so much. I may spell poorly when in a rush, but at least I'm not a petty spell checker. Hmm Ari Fletcher, Bradley Blakeman, a handful of big Bush contributors... sounds like a mouthpiece group to me. So, unless you have anything but personal attacks... shut your pie hole.
Thats what they are, a handful. But it seems that the vast majority of contributors to the organizations I mentioned are far left organizations or inividuals.
To "condemn" moveon would be to condemn the first ammendment. Any REAL patriot would want 9/11 re-opened and reinvestigated. It is the modern day Reichstag.
I love when people use the first amendment as cover to tell you what you shouldn't be saying. By the way, every 911 conspiracy theory has been refuted by these little things called facts. I guess you are going to have to find something else to use to prop up your pathetic ego. P.S. I hope the use of an actual reference didn't scare you so bad that you dropped your bong. Have a nice day...
LMAO "the forces of america are winning" Anyone have proof of this? I didn't think so. It's so sad when people go against a site for PEACE. Is it 1984 yet? WAR = PEACE? IGNORANCE = STRENGTH?
oooh booo hoo, Republican can't stand it when "liberals" get as rude as Republicans. Guess what, not all of us are "flower children" Being anti-war and anti-violence doesn't mean backing down VERBALLY to those that wrap themselves up in the flag when it's convenient.
You know, it's not just white males in Iraq but someone watching these video may never know there are Asians, Hispanic/Latino and Blacks; and Women! Not only am I saying your message is biased, it's also racist and sexist. Response?
Comment removed
tubervidfreak 2 years ago
Freedom's Watch is a Washington D.C. based 501(c)(4) lobbying organization. Freedom's Watch is supportive of the Bush administration's positions in the War on Terror and of Republican Congressional candidates. The group is run and supported, in part, by several former officials of the Bush administration. In the 2008 election cycle, Freedom's Watch purchased advertisements in support of Republican congressional candidates. Buttholes!
Joeclarlk 3 years ago
Freedoms Watch was co-founded and funded by Mel Sembler, who was involved with the forged CIA documents, which Bush used in his State of the Union address. Sembler is the man behind the curtain for Freedom Watch's spin machine. FR also has Karl Rove as a paid consultant. FR is a 401c4 organization to give the appearance that they are an independent organization. In reality, they are an extension of Karl Roves dirty tricks media operation. Ignore EVERYTHING FR SAYS!!! It is mostly Propaganda!!!
OperationTailGunner 3 years ago
This groups leader, brad Blakman opposes the new GI Bill. yea right he supports the troops. This group is nothing but war profiteers and their neocon puppets.
Yukkione 3 years ago
war is bullshit
madnessmoe 3 years ago
I see the moronic comments and asking answered or stupid questions is still a tactic of the extreme left as if it didn't demean their own positions and intellect. No wonder they hide as trolls.
There are even a few rooting against troops and advocating that we let our nation be destroyed with all it's people to become martyrs. If that really worked, then why not kill themselves in protest of things, anything. They can kill themslves and I'll see if it changes my mind.
PhantomRazor 3 years ago 2
If what they said is a lie wouldn't they be subjected to lawsuits? Please define what exactly "victory" in Iraq means? When will it come? At what cost? How many more Americans have to die to achieve it? Didn't Bush declare "victory" five years ago on that aircraft carrier?
breezeman199 3 years ago
"Victory" in Iraq means securing an oil supply for Israel.
LesIieVanHouten 3 years ago
No, he declared 'Mission Accomplished' the mission however was going to war. The mission kept changing since.
nobodyfspecial 3 years ago
The "mission" was going to war, not winning the war? By that standard Adolf Hitler achieved "mission accomplished" on June 22 1941 when he went to war with the USSR! Of course it ended in ruin for him and Germany. The "mission" kept changing? No. What kept changing was their need to come up with a false justification when the Causus Belli - WMD - turned out to be a bust.
breezeman199 3 years ago
How about calling on congress to condemn Rush Limbaugh for calling any soldier against the war "phony soldiers". Who gives a shit about Petreaus? He's not fighting the battles, and he aint no Eisenhower or Macarthur. So you fascist cocksuckers at Freedoms watch can burn in hell for eternity. You are a radical reactionary group.
Captainamerica90 3 years ago
Freedom's Watch is irrelevant. MoveOn crushes them without even mentioning their name in ads.
SinjiOnO 3 years ago
What Tom said. :D
SAJse 3 years ago
What a load of crap!
Everyone involved in this sort of propaganda should be ashamed.
LesMonks 3 years ago
A country of blind fools following faith without thinking. Yeah I dislike Obama supporters too.
ThatsmyYokoOno 4 years ago 2
completely stupid
kmarkymark 4 years ago
Who does this ad appeal to? The voice over is so weak, it sounds ike he is ready to cry. And the message is so far removed from reality that it is absurd on it's face.
America and the Forces of Freedom are winning? LMAO - are they like the Fantastic Four?
Frredom's Watch - ROFLMAO.
t0msawyer77 4 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
US INVADED:Mexican troops murdered former Rio Bravo mayor, a US federal legislator and 4 others US federal agents yesterday, Jan.8th, on US soil. OUR Federal agents prevented local reporters from accessing the scene, roughing up photographers and threatening others with arrest.DEMAND EXPLANATIONS! USELESS SENATORS, MAYORS & GOVERNORS MAKE USELESS PRESIDENTS! KNOW--B4 U VOTE
gematria79 4 years ago
forces of freedom? hah the bullshit propaganda makes me laugh.
morimoko 4 years ago
Mad, I say VERY MAD props to the voice work on that ad. Did you hear the quivering, the vindication...the fear? That guy did an excellent job. That was some seriously tight propaganda.
kalidyne 4 years ago
Bullshit. There can be no clear victory in Iraq.
PorvariArto 4 years ago 2
Man and I thought Hitler had properganda down pat!
Yakovich 4 years ago
It's WRONG
Except when the target is John Kerry
lynch03 4 years ago
I am sorry but Generals have a hard time telling the truth to the Commander in Cheif. He became a mouth piece of the GOP and they paraded him out like a piece of meat. Look at General Powell the GOP used him and then pact him aside like an old car. This General along with other Generals let young men and women go to jail when they knew that the orders for Abu Ghraib came from the office of Rummy. Not one General stood up for these soldiers.
RetMarineviews 4 years ago
I think the thing that MoveOn is forgetting is that General Petraeus isn't a politician, he's a military general. Let me repeat...a general. The man has worked his ass off to get to where he has gotten and it's an extremely honorable, prestigous position. To say that he has betrayed us? That's a little strong. No general has anything but America's interests in mind. He's not a politician. We don't treat him like a politician.
kgj08 4 years ago
Hopefully this will describe my point a lot better. We've all had teachers that we know didn't like us. Teachers that didn't like us hated to give us good grades. They hated to recognize and reward our effort and our success. This is sort of the same thing. MoveOn hates the idea of people fighting for a common good, and they refuse to recognize, and certainly reward, their efforts and their accomplishments.
kgj08 4 years ago
No move on and others need to point out the truth others beside yourself really want to hear all sides. You on the other hand are just like a mushroom sit in the dark and get fed shit
RetMarineviews 4 years ago
How so? MoveOn hates the idea of people who continue to fight for a lie, with a lie, under a band of liars, and a lot of Americans feel that way. The lie they fight for is "stability in the region", when they're really there for plunder.The lie they fight with is "freedom", "liberation", and a "victory". The liars they serve are the Bush administration and the right wing.
Scentless 4 years ago 2
1) When you get up in front of the American people and lie to them with a straight face, your rank, status, and achievements don't matter. If you actually read the ad and looked at the sources posted on the moveon page, you'd see that almost everything he said was a fabrication. So what if he's a general? Just because he has a position of authority doesn't mean that he's immune from criticism and can do no wrong.
Scentless 4 years ago
I never said that he's not immune from criticism and can't do wrong. Show me where I said that? Liberals always stretch and twist the words of conservatives and take them too far. Saying that Petraeus is betraying the American people is way too strong. Does MoveOn have a better candidate for his position?
kgj08 4 years ago
"I think the thing that MoveOn is forgetting is that General Petraeus isn't a politician, he's a military general. Let me repeat...a general. The man has worked his ass off to get to where he has gotten and it's an extremely honorable, prestigous position. To say that he has betrayed us? That's a little strong."
That's exactly what you said. So what should they say? He sold out American lives and our livelihood at home for a lie and a dollar.
Scentless 4 years ago 3
My point is, it doesn't matter who the general was, MoveOn hates Republicans, they hate the military, they've got something against good guys fighting bad guys (don't like the military, don't like cops, etc.), and they think that if we win this war that the Republicans have won and the Democrats have lost. Republicans don't look at it like that. It's not a political matter.
kgj08 4 years ago
Bullshit. If it's not political, why do they ignore domestic issues (save for taxcuts for the rich and denying healthcare)to promote the "War on Terror" at every debate, on every network, every newspaper, and every ad. Why do ads like this exist? A public service? The only thing that can come out of this war is defeat, dead soldiers, wounded soldiers,dead civilians, and a wounder American image aroudn the world. It cannot be won.
Scentless 4 years ago
He treated himself like a politician when he allowed himself to be paraded like a piece of meat for this president pleasure.
RetMarineviews 4 years ago 2
That comment has no base. How did he allow himself to be paraded. He said that the military situation in Iraq is going well but the political situation isn't. Weren't there like 18 goals or something? He said we only had about half of them down. How is that being a meat puppet for the president? Even John Murtha has admitted we're doing well militarily in Iraq.
kgj08 4 years ago
"Surrender is not an option; victory is America's only choice."
This, my friends, is a false dilemma. Congratulations, Freedomswatch: you failed Intro to Logic at the community college.
bogusgregarious 4 years ago
Victory is our only option.
YoungPolitician 4 years ago
Tell me, what is victory, in your opinion. How can we win a war against an "enemy" that gains new recruits for every second the US military remains on their soil? How can we win a war against foes who can't be distinguished from civilians? How can we win when there is no stable government, and no infrastructure?
Stop and think, instead of spitting out nationalistic phrases. Wake up. I feel sorry for people like you, really, I do.
Scentless 4 years ago
are you talking about iraq or the us.
mike1111qq 4 years ago
blow me! fighting for peace is like screwing for virginity - who pays for this bullshit to brainwash decent americans? you should be ashamed
droflov 4 years ago
this is awesome!!!! the left-wing wimps will spit and slober all over this as they cry like the bitches they are
jpjohnson71 4 years ago
you my freind are a dumbass
morimoko 4 years ago
we dont need to "support" the troops wen need to get them the fuck out of iraq, this freedom watch is a pile of bullshit, this war has no point other than to raise oil prices and all of you that are to stubborn to realize the truth, you should be the ones fighting in iraq, you should feel the pain that these men and women have felt. then maby you will realize how bad and pointless this war is, then maby you will get respet not only from me, but from the world.
morimoko 4 years ago
If you really cared about our soldiers like you say you do you would LET THEM WIN!
YoungPolitician 4 years ago
How will "winning" help anyone? Do you know what "winning" does to a soldier?
Have you ever noticed that a soldier will tell you almost anything...except about the times he's killed people?
Think about that. Hell, my grandfather didn't even see combat in England, and he NEVER talked about those things. This is not a game. You don't get a prize for winning.
Why don't you people get that?
bogusgregarious 4 years ago
What you get for winning is FREEDOM, why don't people get that? There are people who are using Islam to kill thousands of people. More people died on 9/11/2007 than have died in the Iraq war! The terrorist want to follow us home and kill our families. Our soldiers that have been captured by them have to listen to Hillary Clinton while being tortured!
americans4mccain 4 years ago
Follow us home and kill our families." You're so afraid of a suicide bomber that you'd have otherwise good men fly B52 bombers to go blow up other people's families. You don't care whose children die so long as you feel good about your own safety. You don't care how many people lose their freedom, as long as you have yours.
"More people died on 9/11/2007 than have died in the Iraq war!" Wrong. More AMERICANS have died - or are Iraqis not people? Nobody knows how many Iraqis we've killed.
bogusgregarious 4 years ago 2
I feel sorry for you and McCain. McCain lost my repect when he allowed this president to call his wife a drunk and drug addict and did nothing. They don't want to follow us home that is the brain washing that you have allowed your small brain to except. Any torture would be another 4 years of this GOP and the new war in Iran. I am sure that you think we can kill them all. Bomb them back to the stone ages. You are just like Olbermann said the other night the blind leading the blind.
RetMarineviews 4 years ago
first of all, i never hear republicans making personal attacks on liberals like saying blind leading blind, small brain etc, etc. And isn't it Barack Obama that said he will consider military action against Iran if he is President?
kgj08 4 years ago
Win what? You win a war by surrender or absolute defeat of the "enemy". The Iraqi insurgents are not a nation-we can't bring them to surrender. The more you kill, the more angry their constituents will be. The only way you can win in that way is genocide, which some chickenhawk right wingers seriously support. The "War on Terror" can never be won. It's just an excuse for an eternal war to benefit corporate interests, spread empire and create an oligarchy in the US.
Scentless 4 years ago 2
Let me get this straight...
An irrelevant conservative organization called "Freedom's Watch", supported by Newt Gingrich (of all people), wants to "watch" a more successful and influential organization called "Move On", and condemn them for utilizing their "Freedom" of Speech?
A commercial network, such as NBC, has every right to refuse service to anyone. Read the sign. Just like the sane and respectful refuse to watch FOX News. You are a joke.
FuckYouBush 4 years ago
you can not fight terror, it is not a person, it is a concept you can not win against a concept
Brown, David. "Study Claims Iraq's 'Excess' Death Toll Has Reached 655,000". Washington Post. 11 Oct. 2006.
markkorea33m 4 years ago
this is complete bullshit
morimoko 4 years ago
Republian comlaining of charges betrayal and name calling? that's the only way they get elected. since 2001 anyone who said a word against the President and his wars, was a traitor.
crazyhawk85 4 years ago
Any 'War on Terror' is a war not meant to be won. Propaganda rousers like this make me want to vomit copious amounts of bile upon Gen. Petraeus' living room couch.
possiblyso 4 years ago
Hasn't being "anti-war" lost it's "trendy" factor yet? Good night, how long can these people spout the same "no war for oil" "Bush lied American's died" etc crap before it becomes "old"?
yamagoof 4 years ago
Echidna terrorists were behind 9/11! Even the President agrees.
SkateboardingFemale1 4 years ago
help get a republican elected president in '08
Thank you Moveon,
you make the White House more conservative~
StellarMortem 4 years ago
Conservative enough to create the highest deficits in our history? Yeah, that's real conservative. Conservative doesn't mean anything anymore, except for "Gays can't marry, abortions should be illegal, and we'll send billions of dollars in weapons to foreign countries that support our "interests"". Yeah, conservative is just a goddamn word.
youngseandunn 4 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
war never solved anything and it never will!!
madnessmoe 4 years ago
Madeness, that has to be in the top 10 most ignorant statements I have ever read. Keep spouting brainless cliches, it makes everyone else look smarter.
alfimon 4 years ago 4
Well said!
RightiTiS 4 years ago
Tell that to the Nazis & the slaves in the south...
kkjknk 4 years ago 2
WTF!!
futureshocker 4 years ago
boo hoo, they made fun of our general!
guess freedom's watch didn't hear that petraeus' boss referred to him as an "ass kissing chickenshit" and more.
I'll listen to you tell me the ESCALATION is working when you explain why we're there in the first place.
Street5pirit 4 years ago
it's wrong to fight against tyranny? Fuck that, I'd rather be a patriot and be hated for it than be a neocon and take pride in destroying the constitution.
violin94 4 years ago
MoveOn is WINNING, because more Americans are refusing to swallow the jingoisting war-mongering lies of the fascist right wing and their loyal propaganda units like this "Freedoms Watch." Petraeus did betray us. Bush and the rest of his criminal enterprise betrayed us long ago. Power to the people!
jwitker 4 years ago
Exactly, jwitker.. couldn't have said it better myself. Power to the people! MoveOn rocks!
VronRN 4 years ago
You must be kidding.
If not, try to acknowledge that politicians of all slants make power plays if they need to. Under that context, examine unanimously approving Petraeus and then immediately questioning his reliability... then how about bi-partisanly approving a war they would gain back power by decrying??
Vet223 4 years ago
Betrayal, pssh... Petraeus is SAVING us - we just finished the lowest month of civilian/US casualties in 2 years (after a steady decline for last 5-6 months) by his strategies... if that's what traitors do we need more of them.
Vet223 4 years ago
libetard nut case.
sublimepro 4 years ago
If the U.S. undertakes military action against Iran, you can credit such longtime neoconservatives as Norman Podhoretz, William Kristol, Michael Ledeen and the right wing think tanks. You can also credit Pastor John Hagee and his Christians United for Israel, a Christian Zionist outfit with unbending support for Israel. And credit also the billionaire and multimillionaire founders of Freedom's Watch for helping smooth the way. They will all be cheering from under their beds.
getplaning 4 years ago
Or, you could thank the 'supreme leader' and the barbarous dictatorship that has been waging a proxy war against us since 1979.
But whatever, blame America first I guess.
Vet223 4 years ago 3
And yet another hate-filled, liberal talking head explodes into a cloud of rage and hate for our military, gov't, and country in general. Can anyone out there who is/was a service member please tell me what the name of the class was that taught us to intentionally "slaughter hundreds of Innocent civilians?" I must have missed that course during basic training.
Axtreemd 4 years ago
It's the one you took only in the mind of a liberal. In the building next to where John Kerry learned to raze villages in a fashion reminiscent of Genghis Khan.
Can't believe you don't remember that! :)
blogagog 4 years ago
the class was Basic Combat 101: Shoot at anything that moves and stab at anything that doesn't
violin94 4 years ago
What a F**cking Joke. Do you even know what it is like to go into a village and slaughter hundreds of Innocent civilians. That is what this war does. Oh and by the way, you obviously did not get the memo....there was never any connection to 911 and Iraq thus the war on terror is in Afghanistan. Dumb ass.
kenlevens 4 years ago
Really, it's what this war does? The only thing I ever did to hundreds of innocent civilians at a time was hand out school supplies, toys, radios, and water. Something tells me that's not synonymous with 'slaughter.'
And nobody ever claimed there was a 9/11 connection. But Saddam was a terrorism supporter. And by the time Saddam was ousted, Al Qaeda was there... so it's always been part of the War on Terror as well.
Vet223 4 years ago
Dude...The bullshit connection between Saddam and 9/11 was a huge part of the propaganda to get us into this thing. Sadam was a scumbag military dictator which also made him an enemy of Al-Qaeda.
ryanjamesdavis 4 years ago 3
Negative. No such connection was ever drawn, that was purely an assumption by ill-informed constituents. All that Bush ever said was that Saddam had links to terrorism, which he did. (It's not called the "Global War on Al Qaeda")
And FYI several of such anti-Israeli terrorists that Saddam was linked to, AQ was linked to as well. Although AQ seeks to overthrow or accumulate all governments of muslim countries, they at least shared a few contacts and a few goals.
Vet223 4 years ago
Saddam was a secular, totalitarian ruler who did not tolerate religious fundamentalists. Al Quaeda did not gain a foothold in Iraq precisely because Saddam considered them an enemy and a threat to his grip on power.
No one is buying the bullshit any more.
getplaning 4 years ago
Actually, look at say, history of women's rights in Iraq and you can see that he at least reached out to fundamentalists when it was in his interests. At first women were relatively free under Saddam, but he cracked down on it like a good little islamist.
And there were terrorists living under his roof that were tacitly (most) and implicityly (Zarqawi) linked to AQ.
Vet223 4 years ago
...Obviously as an authoritarian regime he wouldn't let them rule a town or put shariah law above his, but he was hardly our ally against terror.
Even aside from AQ, do you think it would be OK for him to try and arm any of the terrorists he WAS affiliated with?
Vet223 4 years ago
Zarqawi stayed in the north, out of Saddam's reach. Saddam would have killed him if he had an opportunity, something Bush and Cheney prevented the Pentagon form doing several times.
getplaning 4 years ago
Except when he was travelling to Basra to meet people on the border there. Or when he was injured on the way and holed up for months (with his whole "crew") at a hospital in Baghdad. In either case, we never said it was a "war on Al Qaeda" so the dangerous people were not limited to Zarqawi and Abu Nidal and the rest with AQ 'links'- the terrorists Saddam definitively funded or supported are terrorists too.
Vet223 4 years ago
Why read the New York Times, when I have Fox news.
veriteez 4 years ago
God Bless America!!! VIVA... FREEDOM'S WATCH" ABAJO LOS IZQUIERDISTAS...DOWN WITH THE LEFTISTS...
freedom4cubanow 4 years ago
Go back to Cuba and fight for the freedom of those people.
Yukkione 4 years ago
Hear that? A "go back to" from a liberal. I thought that was for those that are racist but also exclusively conservative. Oh well.
Sometimes Cubans make better Americans than democrats. They've seen what the far left and big government can do, while spoiled Americans complain about how unfair our comparatively spectacular society is.
Vet223 4 years ago
I said "go back and fight for your country." Instead of having special priviliges here and just waiting for something miraculous to happen.
Yukkione 4 years ago
Castro dying and shit shaking up on it's own is not miraculous, it's very likely.
I'm all for fighting for one's country, but historically you're usually between a rock and a hard place without foreign aid for your revolution.
That and many Cubans I knew in the Army would say "America is my country", and they certainly act it. Second only to Vietnamese in commie-hating, and being red-white-and-blue to the bone.
Vet223 4 years ago
On a side note, ariak (since I'm always confused about you neo-con fascist conspiracy types)...
Was Bill Clinton part of this supposed fascist movement too, or did he spend so much time in office worrying about islamofascists because he just really likes Bush + co.?
Vet223 4 years ago
"misplaced rage"
First, it's not rage so much as joining up to solve a difficult problem. Rage has no place in defeating people who grew up indoctrinated- their madrasas are a better target of rage.
Second, it's not misplaced. See this brings me back to Bush's biggest mistake in the war on terror - using fear and talking points to justify himself instead of educating the masses...
Vet223 4 years ago
...He could have spent all that time telling people that islamofascists have used terrorism against us for decades as a means to an end to overthrow more moderate governments in the mideast and make a powerful caliphate to force others under shariah law, but he wasted that time oversimplifying it- "they hate our freedom." And you rightfully were skeptical. Not too late to learn the real deal though... try reading Shadow War or Losing Bin Laden by Richard Miniter.
Vet223 4 years ago
... also, the senate knew Petraeus would be called upon to report what he finds in Iraq to congress- speculation that he was a partisan shill was addressed then, and he was unanimously approved.
Vet223 4 years ago
So was Gonzolas. laughable eh? So was FEMA director Brown. Just because an ineffectual congress gives these people a free pass, does not mean they are great for the job. Not one right winger has addressed the fudging of the numbers as reported by the WAPO or the fact that Petraeus is arming both sides of the Iraqi civil war.
Yukkione 4 years ago 2
But those were ordinary positions at the time, where only competence was a concern.
Petraeus was voted unanimously on when it was already known that he would be called back from the theater to report to an upset congress on the progress.
Petraeus himself adressed the claim of arming militias- he said we don't. That matches my experiences in Iraq and Afghanistan- the only people I've ever seen receive weapons from us are those countries' respective governments.
Vet223 4 years ago
He also addressed Ethno-Secarian Violence (ESV) methodology. It is not fudging the numbers, it is a long-standing methodology (developed first by the CIA and DIA) that was criticized by WAPO. Nobody was bitching when the same methodology showed a sharp increase in 2006, but now they complain when it's good news.
The WAPO article apparently wasn't fact checked, since the SOP is unclasified (next comment), and contains such powerful un-names sources such as "a senior official".
Vet223 4 years ago
The article is misleading to the point of lies- here is the methodology SOP. It's very simple, and a "shot anywhere in the head" is considered an execution.
qando dot net/uploads/images/ESV%20methodology dot pdf
Vet223 4 years ago
Admiral William Fallon, chief of central command, derided Petraeus as a sycophant. Fallon told Petraeus that he considered him to be "an ass kissing little chickenshit" and added "hate people like that".
Yukkione 4 years ago
Fallon is merely a talking point that proves you don't have to tow the line for Bush to appoint you.
He's not had the boots-on-ground experience, his forte' is Navy fighter pilot, and he has fundamental disagreements about this war with the guy who literally wrote the book on counterinsurgency. Which one would you trust?
Vet223 4 years ago
This ad shamefully and dishonestly refers to terms like 'victory and 'surrender is not an option.' That is sick, twisted propaganda. It's an occupation. Furthermore, civilian command policies (Bremer's CPA and Rumsfeld's light boots on the ground model) have made the prospect of a successful occupation IMPOSSIBLE. What sort of sick civilian command asks soldiers to carry out an impossible mission?
broadcast12345 4 years ago 2
Ahh/...... freedom of speech goes both ways... something liberals seem to forget. They think that becuase you are "free" to say something that it makes what your are saying right. Or they think that others cannot use thier free speech to speak out against what liberals say.
Don't conuse the legal right to say something, with being right in what you say.
joejoeirish 4 years ago
You go, Joe Joe! Liberals think no one should criticize their (incessent) criticism. We (on the right) are mobilizing. Get ready!
2405Black 4 years ago
Here is the thing you dont understand. Freedom of speech is not being able to say things with impunity. It being able to say things knowing that there are those that may have a different opinion who may criticise your ideas. No one is criticising free speach, but the ideas that are spoken.
Yukkione 4 years ago 3
You speak truth. The Left only beleives in Freedom of Speach when they are the ones speaking.
Khan004 4 years ago
I believe in the Bill of Rights and the freedoms that it guarantees to all American citizens. Do you?
geekskurge 4 years ago
I trust the public to know this ad is trumped us to sell the war.
Isn't it interesting that MoveOn gets so much attention in the Congress, but these folks are considered "moderate" or what?
They are not moderate. I'd say, purveyors of lies.
edwarddoten 4 years ago
Search Youtube for: Iraq for Sale Banned Excerpts
See some of the reasons the war will go on and on .
Yukkione 4 years ago
"so here's a thought
fuck the troops.
fuck anyone who wastes time talking about our war.
3,000 people died in 9/11. people act like that was a big deal.
places like africa have over 30,000 people dieing a DAY from starvation alone. thats ten 9/11's every day for africans. cigarettes, drugs, cancer, POLLUTION. the list of death tolls from these things separately all dwarf this little war."
Apparently people dislike my earlier comment a great deal. Anyone care to actually address it?
asprin4themasses 4 years ago
"People act like that was a big deal."
No need, it's an argument against itself.
When some asshole comes to your house and kills somebody you love, don't bother asking the police for help because it's no big deal- they're better of quitting the force to help cure cancer, since your family member was just one little person.
Vet223 4 years ago
your warping the argument. im not talking about longshot things, just simple things. conserving resources. donating a few dollars to the starving DIRECTLY saves laves.
in order to put it into proper terms, you have to say if said police quit the force they WILL cure cancer and save millions, and then yes they should ignore my family member.
asprin4themasses 4 years ago
Vet223: Juxtaposing irrelevant set of discourses to draw an obscure conclusion wouldn't get you far in life. You don't even care about your own neighbor being screwed over by the mortgage company, getting evicted, and losing his entire livelihood, now you want to tell everyone you have "feelings" for people you've never met? Apathy, that's what America is about. 9/11 is just another excuse for a credulous moron like you to bitch about something.
ariakokoschka 4 years ago
That's exactly what I was criticizing HIM for... 9/11 was no big deal because famine still exists? What kind of shit is that? Famine has always existed and it doesn't negate anything else I feel is important, nor our right to self defense or reactionary preventive intervention.
Who the fuck are you to tell me who I don't care about? I lose sleep over the Iraqis I met exactly once, because for some we may be about to abandon them for the third time.
Vet223 4 years ago
It's always about "us" vs. "them" mentality, isn't it? Next time try to think around it in a global scale; there is no you, there is no me, there is "everyone." You have more than two brain cells, try to rob them against each other time to time. If famine is minimized, there would be less uneducated, oppressed, impoverished people who wouldn't follow a religious ideology. If you can't see our policies are channeling the world destruction, then all hopes are lost.
ariakokoschka 4 years ago
You might as well stick to your mindless wrestling, urine-flavored beer, and roasted peanuts for your misplaced rage. You stop your fucking charade on Iraqi sympathy and think about half a dozen "mega-bases," which cost $2 Billion/each, and mega-embassy that's going to house 5-8k personals and God knows how many security staff. With such sheer magnitude of construction on top of the oil fields, you go ponder about our permanent stay for the next 80 years. Now go leak your imaginary wounds.
ariakokoschka 4 years ago
Lol, another stereotypical US-bashing... euro, is it?
1. Since all Americans like fake wrestling, all Europeans are lazy fucks who won't fix my AC with any degree of efficiency in the middle of an Italian August.
2. I don't drink American beer, and it does taste like piss - hefeweizen and belgian stuff for me.
Vet223 4 years ago
3. Who gives a shit how big a base is, when the US Army's goals are to hand them over to Iraqis as efficiently as possible? We're not there for their oil, and we're not there to personally run security for 80 years. Every goal we tried to meet while I was there contradicted those supposed goals.
Vet223 4 years ago
See what happens when you don't finish your high school? You cannot even put a cohesive set of ideas together; what the fuck are you blathering about?
Ya, so you want to tell me why the United States of America is building 6-10 mega-bases on the oil fields of another sovereign country IF they are "planning" to wrap up their humanitarian invasion in the next few years? Oh, so now you claiming we have a goal?
ariakokoschka 4 years ago
It is a cohesive set of ideas- I responded to two of your baseless accusations about me, and third, your asinine ideas about the goals of the US Army in Iraq.
Because we blew up most of the Iraqis' old bases? Just a guess. Do you think if this were about securing the oil ourselves far into the future we would be spending billions on training Iraqi military and police as quickly as possible? ...
Vet223 4 years ago
... Don't you think if this were about oil we'd have actually reduced the price we're paying for it by now, shortly before America is likely to put a defeatocrat in power?
We've always had a very clear goal, as most soldiers can tell you. Not that we don't love hearing liberals complain that we don't know why we're there.
Vet223 4 years ago
"Because we blew up most of the Iraqis' old bases?"
There were no bases to begin with; they all were demolished in the 90's. This is a clear indication that you don't even read the responses throughly. You can go juggle with your 4th-grade education on how oil has nothing to do with this war. Have you taken a look at the petroleum laws being passed in Iraq? I guess not.
ariakokoschka 4 years ago
"Don't you think if this were about oil we'd have actually reduced the price we're paying for it by now"
Haha, gotta love it when these dope heads getting vaccinated with GED[F-]. It's not about your or my interest -- it's what "they" going to put in their pockets. No wonder Americans are getting fist fucked every day and in return they apologize for being too tight. The profits are being reaped somewhere else, you are being walked on as we speak.
ariakokoschka 4 years ago
Wail on your gratuitous failed assumptions -- I am not even liberal. But it's typical of you hillbillies to fire up a "liberal" bashing machine guns out of utter despondent so you can feel good about your amputated mind set.
ariakokoschka 4 years ago
"The US Army has a realistic system for classifying enemy combatants."
Oh boy, realism and military never go hand in hand. The affairs in this war are being conducted by a bunch of 20-something-year-old's who can't even pull their own shit out. From your response it's clear that there is NO Al-Quaeda anywhere except in your hysterical ill-prepared responses and imaginary boogie-men flashed on your TV screen. Go leak your fancied wounds.
ariakokoschka 4 years ago
"You've literally not read a thing that characters like UBL and Zawahiri"
I am smart enough not to buy into state sponsored "celebrity" brouhaha of some barefooted fundamentalist and millions like him -- we got a lot of them in this country; let's do something about them first. And you are getting hotter; bankers but drop the Jewish stereotype -- you may end up in a solitary confinement for the rest of your life.
ariakokoschka 4 years ago
It's entertaining (and sad if you have apathy for this world) when media announces a junkie operating in some corner of the world, planning to poke the "freedom" in the eyes. With all these "Al-Quaeda" minions all over place, you want to tell us, no one, not even the CIA knew about these guys before hand? People just don't grow out of the ground, you know. But then again, in capitalism you can bullshit any factual fallacies and spoon feed it to people as you please.
ariakokoschka 4 years ago
"the doctors and other educated people with money and bright futures who join him"
Oh ya? name 100 "doctors" who are _directly_ working for UBL. You say they are "everywhere," right? Let's see what you got. How many did you strangle with you bare hands?
ariakokoschka 4 years ago
"Saudi Arabia is a fairly rich country by most accounts"
Next time do your fucking research before regurgitating every piece of crap you happen to hear. Saudi Arabia's GDP per capita was $8500 last year which ranks somewhere in or around 100th in the world. No only that, the wealth is dispersed disproportionally. In either case, why don't we attack them instead? Isn't it funny any sort of "ally" we've had throughout the years has turned against the U.S.?
ariakokoschka 4 years ago
Isn't it a bit odd that the absence of U.S. presence in any country is pretty much correlated with privation of "terrorism?" That gets you thinking: Maybe... MAYBE the U.S. is a catalyst to all the terror in this world? Isn't that swell...
ariakokoschka 4 years ago
Nope. Before all that there was Israel, and we and the British were accused of intervening to help Israel against the Arab countries before we actually were (scapegoat for getting their asses kicked). The colony-taking euros had more to do with that, but you can't go through life blaming people for WWII era faults. Then of course Russia did their part to turn some against us during the cold war as well. Funny how things work out.
Vet223 4 years ago
Actually it's over 15,000 according to the IMF and it's in the 40's. Above Poland and way above Russia, at a glance. Where are all the Russian terrorists, if money's so important?
A good sentiment about attacking them, right now they give good intel and appease us, but it's sick that they produce brainwashed IF's too. Eventually they'll be on the problem list if we haven't changed them through actions elsewhere in the region (the plan).
Vet223 4 years ago
Even you should be able to see THAT logical fallacy- you name 100 PEOPLE who are _directly_ working for him!
The fact that even the trigger-men in the last western attack were well educated, is enough food for thought.
And I never said they are everywhere, either.
But in any case, you're the one making the claim- what evidence do you have that poverty is a principle cause of terrorism? (be wary about the correlation vs causation fallacy, since you're about to commit it)
Vet223 4 years ago
When the media announces? See here's your problem, your connection to the world begins there instead of looking beyond what they feed you.
And nobody's planning to 'poke' anything, they're planning to let someone just like people you know burn to death in a massive fireball and blast.
Vet223 4 years ago
And yet another idiotic claim from you, that I said anything about us not knowing about them beforehand. Clinton said over and over again he was worried about UBL and AQ, but average joe was too ignorant and content to follow him.
"In capitalism" bwahaha, yes you are a liberal my friend. What is it you think, authoritative control over all industries, the media included, is going to better inform us? Silly commie.
Vet223 4 years ago
I see. You're SMART enough to know nothing about the guys who ordered fellow citizens killed by the thousands. How keen of you. But... how can you claim it's state sponsored propaganda if you admittedly don't pay attention?
And barefooted? Did you miss that last conversation? These guys wear sandals, and many could afford golden ones. You're sitting here trying to dismiss or belittle the people behind the most dangerous ideas in the world right now.
Vet223 4 years ago
What the hell would you know about the military? What you learned from movies? I'm not saying I never saw bureaucratic messes in my 4 years, but those assessments are realistic. If what you say is true and everybody is called Al Qaeda, why would an infantryman like myself bother knowing the acronyms ACM and AQAM? It's not like I had to lighten things up for the media, that's for talking internally to other soldiers.
Vet223 4 years ago
Really. Anarchist then? If not I'm so sorry... who'd have thought, someone thinks 9/11 was no big deal and assumes the worst from the US military, that isn't a far left loon.
FYI I bash social conservatives just as much, being that I'm neo-libertarian.
Vet223 4 years ago
By who, the Iraqis? Their oil is selling as high too, are they getting rich and laughing at us? and **American oil companies are buying at what now, 70?** I thought Bush was an old oil tycoon's chrony, what's up? He gets criticized for exporting democracy so why not privatize the national oil reserves in 2003 when he had that power?
Vet223 4 years ago
*No* bases? I helped capture several.
In either case, we know that was something they lacked- are you suggesting the Iraqi army shouldn't have any?
Yes, I have seen the petroleum laws that have been brought up, almost 5 years after an early period of having total political control of Iraq, including the one SHOT DOWN BY THE IRAQI PARLIAMENT. So keep juggling your conspiracy theories, America is so evil we MUST be there to oppress and rob them.
Vet223 4 years ago
Vet223: I am not that lucky or else I wouldn't have a disease-minded cockroach like you in this country. And don't bring your puffed up "rage" of everyday life deficiency here -- no one cares if you got fucked in the shower by an Italian guy this morning while belching like a viking god.
ariakokoschka 4 years ago
I don't see any rage here, short of your vitriol and ad hominem. I started off in this thread by calmly responding that 9/11 is in fact a "big deal" despite worldwide constants such as poverty... then you showed up and started slinging baseless insults... so, 'rage boy', 'projecting' any? Got some life deficiency of your own?
Vet223 4 years ago
Hah, that's a laugh. Yeah, watch out for those uneducated, oppressed, DOCTORS, led by the most fervent theocrat of them all, UBL, who was BORN WITH A SILVER SPOON IN HIS MOUTH.
If you have two brain cells to rub together, I suggest you actually research Al-Qaeda, and the expansionist islamic fascist (/totalitarian) movement. In order to understand this situation you have to understand them, and it's not so cut and dry as to claim they'd be fine if they just had money.
Vet223 4 years ago
You dumb-witted cunt, your analogies suck and your silence is blessing. What the fuck does Osama have to do with the point I brought up? You seem like keep losing track of what we are discussing here. You said famine is not as important as 9/11 and I argued, alleviating the economical status of a society would leave fewer uneducated people to end up being some fundamentalist cohort.
ariakokoschka 4 years ago
Of course, you can turn the attention to the U.S. and observe its ignominious stain of imperialism despite its population literacy (or perhaps all the EU and Asia are laughing at my latter assessment).
Al-quaeda is another phrase for neo-fascism by ultra-nationalistic sanguinary elements and credulous jar-heads like you, designed to mask its imperialistic agenda and indoctrinated ethically approved excuse to fuck up the world.
ariakokoschka 4 years ago
The only thing I need to know is whether your mom is suing a sperm that got her impregnated with you or not. It's apparent that every single living organism on this planet is considered to be a part of the Al-Qaeda network, right? Next year, you wouldn't be surprised to hear an insane claim of a woman who postulates on Fox Nazi News her kittie's death was to be blamed on UBL.
ariakokoschka 4 years ago
Tell me, how many "Al-Qaeda" soldiers did you guys actually capture? Or was it just every insurgency or "opposition" militia automatically being labeled as Al-Qaeda these days?
ariakokoschka 4 years ago
"automatically being labeled"
Ahh, my favorite kind of uninformed liberal anti-military accusations... the annoyingly predictable.
The US Army has a realistic system for classifying enemy combatants. AQ is only called such when we can actually confirm a connection to AQ mid-to-upper level leadership. Anybody without...
Vet223 4 years ago
... Anybody without the connections can at most get AQAM (Al Qaeda Affiliated Militia) if they claim solidarity, ACM (Anti Coalition Militia) if they are basically independent. Bigger independents get their own name, like the Mahdi Army, Baath party, Taliban, etc.
Vet223 4 years ago
One thing you may not realize. Is that liberals are not anti military, but against stupid people using the military for shortsighted purposes.
Yukkione 4 years ago
Oh I realize that, I never said ALL liberals are anything. Many are not anti-military, and I would assume you are not either. But lately accusations have been thrown around, in the media and here in this thread. Besides the one assuming the worst at every step, there's the other guy, who simply started off with "fuck the troops." So blame them, because I didn't really go so far as to generalize or stereotype.
Vet223 4 years ago
1972 Lufthansa 1973 Sudan 1979 Iran 1980 Iran 1982 Pan Am(x2) 1983 Beirut(x2) 1983 Kuwait 1984 Beirut(x3) 1984 Spain 1984 Paris 1985 TWA 1985 Egypt Air 1985 cruise ship 1985 Rome 1985 Vienna 1985 Lebanon 1985 Frankfurt 1986 TWA 1986 Pan Am 1986 Berlin 1987 Beirut 1988 S. Lebanon 1988 Naples 1988 Pan Am 1991 Manila 1992 Yemen ...
Vet223 4 years ago
1993 WTC 1995 Saudi Arabia 1995 Pakistan 1996 Saudi Arabia 1997 Pakistan 1997 Virginia 1998 Kenya 1998 Tanzania 1998 Yemen 1999 Pakistan 2000 Uzbekistan 2000 USS Cole 2001 9/11 2002 Philippines 2002 Pakistan 2002 Bali 2002 Jordan 2002 Lebanon 2002 Yemen 2003 Philippines 2003 Yemen
"Anti-US muslim extremist terrorists? what terrorists? scapegoat! overestimated!"
Vet223 4 years ago
So you expect people reading to believe Al-Qaeda is some neocon fantasy or overblown 1984 enemy that will go away if we throw money at it, is that right? You've literally not read a thing that characters like UBL and Zawahiri have said, have you? Been under a rock for the last 30 years of incremental warfare we've been trying to hard to not think about? Oh no I know, you think 12 jewish bankers run the world and this is just a plot to keep Israel afloat?
Vet223 4 years ago
"fundamentalist cohort" has everything to do with UBL. More importantly though, the doctors and other educated people with money and bright futures who join him. Terrorism is not a financial crime, and the link between poverty and terrorism is extremely weak, compared to other crime. Saudi Arabia is a fairly rich country by most accounts and there are more brainwashing madrasas there than anywhere else. This is NOT that simple a problem.
Vet223 4 years ago
Here's another thought, The US military command in Africa provides roughly half of all medical and food aid in the Horn of Africa. And it has been the job of the US military commanders to minimize the number of US causualties in Iraq by pushing for body armor and up-armored vehicles.
Longtrangdukich 4 years ago
oh then we should be happy right? just be thankfull for the little help being sent and forget all about it, thats what we should do.
whats your point anyways?
asprin4themasses 4 years ago
Google: (Guns, not roses, for Iraq) and read the Salon story about Petreus and arms sales to Iraq. He's supplying the very guns which will shoot our troops as well as the ones that he was in charge of in 2004 that came up missing. There is more to this thing than flag wavers care to think about.
Yukkione 4 years ago
He is supplying weapons to a coalition of Sunni paramilitary organizations under the payroll of the Iraqi government and the direct command of the ISF.
Longtrangdukich 4 years ago
Also, be warned, many of the pro Freedom's watch comments are done by the same people with multiple accounts. Freedom's Watch is headed by former Bush Adminstration toady Bradley Blakemen. A google search of the group will reveil who thier millionaire contributors are.
Yukkione 4 years ago
And a google search of CNN, ABC, NBC, or CBS will reveal ( its "ea" not "ei") who their (ei not ie) far left contributors are.
Longtrangdukich 4 years ago
More shameless propoganda by a Bush mouthpiece organisation. The Washington post explained in great detail how Petreus fudged his numbers and his history of supporting Administration claims. Enough is enough
Yukkione 4 years ago
Also Freedom's Watch is not a Bush mouthpiece organization (z not s-I will not always be here to correct you're spelling, go back to elementary english instead of rolling doobies in your van down by the river). So far Bush has done everything he could do unknowingly to lose this war-only now with Gen Petraeus are we really winning. Thanks to Bush, Rumsfeld, and Abizaid 2003 to 2006 have been essentially a holding action.
Longtrangdukich 4 years ago
Sorry that my spelling irked you so much. I may spell poorly when in a rush, but at least I'm not a petty spell checker. Hmm Ari Fletcher, Bradley Blakeman, a handful of big Bush contributors... sounds like a mouthpiece group to me. So, unless you have anything but personal attacks... shut your pie hole.
Yukkione 4 years ago
Thats what they are, a handful. But it seems that the vast majority of contributors to the organizations I mentioned are far left organizations or inividuals.
Longtrangdukich 4 years ago
To "condemn" moveon would be to condemn the first ammendment. Any REAL patriot would want 9/11 re-opened and reinvestigated. It is the modern day Reichstag.
fknugly222 4 years ago
I love when people use the first amendment as cover to tell you what you shouldn't be saying. By the way, every 911 conspiracy theory has been refuted by these little things called facts. I guess you are going to have to find something else to use to prop up your pathetic ego. P.S. I hope the use of an actual reference didn't scare you so bad that you dropped your bong. Have a nice day...
Axtreemd 4 years ago
LMAO "the forces of america are winning" Anyone have proof of this? I didn't think so. It's so sad when people go against a site for PEACE. Is it 1984 yet? WAR = PEACE? IGNORANCE = STRENGTH?
Fatal616 4 years ago
oooh booo hoo, Republican can't stand it when "liberals" get as rude as Republicans. Guess what, not all of us are "flower children" Being anti-war and anti-violence doesn't mean backing down VERBALLY to those that wrap themselves up in the flag when it's convenient.
spookytom 4 years ago
I'm not a republican but I'm in the military. Congrats on sinking as low as the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth.
mpdivo 4 years ago 2
mpdivo
Oh, I see, LYING as the Swift boat vets did is as bad as calling Petraeus on not counting car bombings as DEATHS? OK, whatever.
spookytom 4 years ago
You know, it's not just white males in Iraq but someone watching these video may never know there are Asians, Hispanic/Latino and Blacks; and Women! Not only am I saying your message is biased, it's also racist and sexist. Response?
Steveg20001