Posts by dubla

44

Bin Laden Innocent?

by dubla in

jw
friends

there have been several threads recently where individuals have spoken out against the united states for their actions against afghanistan.

there are some people on this forum who continue to express the belief that bin laden has not had a fair trial up to this point, and these same people have insinuated that perhaps the u.s. doesnt have enough proof against him and his network to take forceful military action.

for any still unclear on this, please click here >>> http://www.cnn.com/2001/world/asiapcf/central/10/10/gen.alqaeda.video/index.html.

dubla

seeker-

yes, you take a bit of a different stand on the whole issue than most of the ones out there crying "injustice!". most of this opinion are also of the opinion that we are not justified in our current actions against the taliban, which is obviously not the case with you.

i understand what youre saying, and i would argue that there is almost always a "better" way to handle a situation then the path that is actually chosen. personally i agree with the way it was all handled, but whenever you get into the politics of a situation, never will all agree. i respect your opinion on bushs actions, even though i applaud them.

as far as getting the support of other countries/states, you are correct, we will never gain blanket support. i would contend though, that we are already getting more support from more of these nations then we would have probably dreamed of back in august. i mean, pakistan? saudi arabia is stepping up now to take appropriate actions? even arafat condemns the terrorists and is in support of the u.s.? id say, in light of it all, we are doing pretty well. there are ALWAYS going to be excuses and reasons for the u.s. to be hated, and our current dealings/attacks will just become, or already are, another of them.

aa

44

Bin Laden Innocent?

by dubla in

jw
friends

there have been several threads recently where individuals have spoken out against the united states for their actions against afghanistan.

there are some people on this forum who continue to express the belief that bin laden has not had a fair trial up to this point, and these same people have insinuated that perhaps the u.s. doesnt have enough proof against him and his network to take forceful military action.

for any still unclear on this, please click here >>> http://www.cnn.com/2001/world/asiapcf/central/10/10/gen.alqaeda.video/index.html.

dubla

seeker-

But you asked about this statement that they would give up bin Laden to a neutral country. Whether they meant it or not, I was just pointing out that I also heard this reported.

fair enough, im not disputing whether or not the statement was made. it just seems that throughout your comments, and paths, that the idea has been "bush shouldve shown them evidence", or "bush shouldve negotiated with them and found a more just way to go about this". personally, i think thats preposterous, as ive stated many times over. that last link i posted, in my mind, shows they never had any intention of cooperating with bush on any negotiations. they kept asking for evidence, yes. who wouldnt stall in the face of attack?

aa

10

Terrorist attacks were a statistical failure......

by LDH in

jw
friends

from my aunt judy.

i plan to share with my 11 yo--the grim news pictures can have affect kids..... .

by now everyone has been hearing the death toll rise and reports of the destruction from the terrorist attacks on the us.

dubla

At that time of the morning, it is estimated that there may have been about 20,000 people at the WTC, not the maximum 50,000. If the planes had hit at, say, 11AM, it would have included far more potential victims.

and the thinking here is?? are you saying the terrorist purposely attacked when the building was only 40% full? i doubt it.

aa

44

Bin Laden Innocent?

by dubla in

jw
friends

there have been several threads recently where individuals have spoken out against the united states for their actions against afghanistan.

there are some people on this forum who continue to express the belief that bin laden has not had a fair trial up to this point, and these same people have insinuated that perhaps the u.s. doesnt have enough proof against him and his network to take forceful military action.

for any still unclear on this, please click here >>> http://www.cnn.com/2001/world/asiapcf/central/10/10/gen.alqaeda.video/index.html.

dubla

seeker-

They must have changed their minds, as you say

oh, i dont say they change their minds at all. i said they say one thing one week, and the opposite the next, but i think it has nothing to do with anyone changing their minds. my theory is that the taliban are directly involved in the sep 11 attacks, and their changing stories are nothing more than blatant lies attempting to play the u.s. govt. as fools.

It was during the time when the Taliban was making one offer after another to meet and talk and discuss proof and evidence, and Bush kept saying Nope.

one lie after another yep. bush said nope every time, as well he shouldve. the u.s. has taken the stance that they will not negotiate with terrorists (and the taliban is treated no different than the actual terrorists they harbor), and why should we negotiate with the people that just leveled nyc? they had ample opportunity to rid their country of terrorism, but they didnt. why? becuase bin laden owns the taliban, financially. click the link i posted, and youll see they all but admit that is their reasoning behind harboring him and his network. its all about money for them, not justice.

aa

12

Teaching the Bible

by Rex B13 in

jw
friends

hi gang,.

let me qualify this post before my usual detractors have a chance to blast me.

i already know that the great majority here do not believe in the one, true god.

dubla

yippee!

aa

44

Bin Laden Innocent?

by dubla in

jw
friends

there have been several threads recently where individuals have spoken out against the united states for their actions against afghanistan.

there are some people on this forum who continue to express the belief that bin laden has not had a fair trial up to this point, and these same people have insinuated that perhaps the u.s. doesnt have enough proof against him and his network to take forceful military action.

for any still unclear on this, please click here >>> http://www.cnn.com/2001/world/asiapcf/central/10/10/gen.alqaeda.video/index.html.

dubla

path-

not to beat a dead horse here, but i had a question on part of your last post.

The taliban said they would give up Bin Laden to a neutral country to be tried and requested the evidence to be presented to them. This is hardly an unreasonable request, a request that most countries require for them to extradite accused people to other countries for a trial.

now i know the taliban have been saying one thing one day, and the opposite the next, but i never saw the same quote you did evidently, saying they would agree to give up bin laden to a "neutral country". i was browsing some articles today, and according to this article, it seems the taliban are unwilling to give up bin laden to the u.s., or any other country for that matter.

>>> http://dailynews.yahoo.com/h/nm/20011012/ts/attack_taliban_leader_dc_1.html

also, in your little scenario that the u.s. supposedly should have at least considered, would the taliban also have given up ALL of al qaeda still in afghanistan, to a "nuetral country"?

aa

44

Bin Laden Innocent?

by dubla in

jw
friends

there have been several threads recently where individuals have spoken out against the united states for their actions against afghanistan.

there are some people on this forum who continue to express the belief that bin laden has not had a fair trial up to this point, and these same people have insinuated that perhaps the u.s. doesnt have enough proof against him and his network to take forceful military action.

for any still unclear on this, please click here >>> http://www.cnn.com/2001/world/asiapcf/central/10/10/gen.alqaeda.video/index.html.

dubla

seeker-

However, I am in favor of the search anyway, for it does reduce the number of hijackings that occur.

yes, you and i agree with most americans, that measures such as these make the united states safer, and are worth giving up some freedoms for.

But when 90% of Americans tell their politicians "Take my rights away! Make me safe!" while agreeing to measures that won't actually make them any safer, I object.

i would probably object to that as well. i havent seen this poll you speak of where 90% agree to worthless measures. the polls i spoke of did center around new security issues, like the airports for example.

aa

44

Bin Laden Innocent?

by dubla in

jw
friends

there have been several threads recently where individuals have spoken out against the united states for their actions against afghanistan.

there are some people on this forum who continue to express the belief that bin laden has not had a fair trial up to this point, and these same people have insinuated that perhaps the u.s. doesnt have enough proof against him and his network to take forceful military action.

for any still unclear on this, please click here >>> http://www.cnn.com/2001/world/asiapcf/central/10/10/gen.alqaeda.video/index.html.

dubla

REX-

first off, i wasnt ignoring any responses to your other post with alan, in fact i wasnt even aware that you had responded. i didnt put that particular one on my email alerts, because frankly i wasnt that interested in it to begin with, it was simply ammusing, as your comments continue to be. as far as my opinion being lowered, thats fine, i really could care less about the whole topic.

SEEKER-

It is not worth it

that is entirely a personal opinion, and i respect yours. personally, i believe it is well worth it. i am willing, as most americans are, to give up some freedoms in order to have greater safety.

aa

536

LET'S MAKE A LITTLE WAGER

by You Know in

jw
friends

perhaps you recall the instance in the bible where samson made a wager with the philistines that they couldnt guess his riddle.

as it turned out they wheedled the answer out of him by his fiancee, but the point is that they had a wager.

since the underlying assumption of the apostasy is that we are not living in the last days of this system of things, and that this world is not facing anything remotely like the biblical apocalypse, at least not any time soon, in the spirit of such antagonism, i would like to propose a similar wager.

dubla

Correct. And I answered "yes." They are imaginary in that a broker's formula has no relevance to the real world.

nice backtracking yk, you do it better than most i must say. if youd like me to cut and paste our original debate on oversold, i will. suffice it to say though that when you originally said that i "imagined" the markets to be oversold, the above is not at all what you meant. you were SPECIFICALLY saying the markets were NOT oversold, and that "oversold" was just a word for the "hucksters"; that oversold levels did not even actually exist. im sure since then you have probably researched it a little, discovering what i told you in the first place, that "oversold" was actually a scientific determination reached by means of a scientific formula, and so now you must stoop to yet more backtracking. your ignorance is so transparent, why do you bother trying to hide it?

You are delusional if you think that the markets can't collapse because they are technically oversold.

sigh, another classic case of yk using someones words out of context. i have never said the markets cant collapse because of oversold levels or becuase of anything else. the fact is that markets can collapse at ANY time, for ANY reason, and no one knows exactly what tomorrow brings. the market could crash tomorrow, and it really wouldnt surprise me one bit. the thing to remember here, is that it has crashed many times before; if it did crash again, it would not be unprecendented.

Indeed, it is obvious to me that your are suffering a massive case of denial and delusion. / You Know

sigh, pot-kettle-black. what am i delusional about? the markets ability to collapse? any idiot with half a lick of knowledge on the markets know they can collapse at any given time. you are really reaching, trying to find a way to call me delusional, arent you? LOL.

aa

536

LET'S MAKE A LITTLE WAGER

by You Know in

jw
friends

perhaps you recall the instance in the bible where samson made a wager with the philistines that they couldnt guess his riddle.

as it turned out they wheedled the answer out of him by his fiancee, but the point is that they had a wager.

since the underlying assumption of the apostasy is that we are not living in the last days of this system of things, and that this world is not facing anything remotely like the biblical apocalypse, at least not any time soon, in the spirit of such antagonism, i would like to propose a similar wager.

dubla

yk-

I understand what you mean by oversold. I understand that that is your technical jargon that has meaning to stock brokers. That's fine. I have no problem with that. / You Know

thats not what i asked. i asked if you thought the oversold levels were imaginary, you answered yes, indicating your lack of understanding once again.

aa