posted on August 13, 2005 08:30:56 PM new
Anti-American/Un-Patriotic
This is a more personal attack than the prior two, and in that sense is similar to calling someone "ignorant" or "intolerant." And like those two words, there certainly are people who are anti-American or un-Patriotic. However, the number of people who truly fit the definition of those terms are far fewer than the number who are given those labels. In short, being anti-American or un-Patriotic would entail actually being against the United States itself. That doesn't mean being against a specific policy of the U.S. government, or even against many policies of the government. It means being against American culture and the American nation as a whole. Thus, a person who advocates the overthrow of the elected U.S. government, or the disollution of the U.S. as a country -- they would fit the definition of anti-American. Osama bin Laden, being that he has made it his goal to attempt to bring about the destruction of the U.S., is definitely anti-American. However, someone who is against the Iraq War? Well, they are anti-War. Someone who is against U.S. trade practices is anti-U.S. trade practices or whatever specific issue they are against. Realistically, labeling somebody as anti-American because they are against a specific policy of the U.S. government, or even certain aspects of the country as a whole, is faulty because there are few people in the nation who agree with everything the government or the country is doing. In fact, I would be disturbed to meet somebody who thought the U.S. was infallible. Moreover, government policies change frequently. So, for example, being that abortion is legal, does that make Pro-Life activists anti-American because they are disagreeing with a government policy? Were those same people not anti-American when abortion was illegal? When Roe v. Wade was decided, did they move from being pro-American to anti-American overnight? How does that whole thing work?
The bottom line is not that there are no anti-American people out there. I have met some people -- Americans -- who seem to have disdain for the United States and everything and everybody in it (those people are usually quite snobby and consider themselves to be everyone's intellectual superior). They seem anti-American in my eyes. However, most people who get stuck with the label are, just like the people who label them, just trying to do what is best for their country. Labeling people as anti-American is, in a very broad sense, anti-American in and of itself. After all, though we have not always lived up to them, some of our basic founding principles were those of freedom of speech and open political discussion. Labeling people as anti-American because you disagree with them is contrary to both of those principles. It stifles political debate and makes people reluctant to voice their opinions. I can't think of many things more anti-American than that.
Absolute faith has been shown, consistently, to breed intolerance. And intolerance, history teaches us, again and again, begets violence.
----------------------------------
President George Bush: "Over time the truth will come out."
President George Bush: "Our people are going to find out the truth, and the truth will say that this intelligence was good intelligence. There's no doubt in my mind."
Bush was right. The truth did come out and the facts are he misled Congress and the American people about the reasons we should go to war in Iraq.
posted on August 13, 2005 08:41:12 PM newFor some reason, logan, you see to be under the impression that you are free to say what you wish.....but I am not.
Just like you are under the impression that everyone must have the same views as this administration otherwise they are Anti-American.
You wouldn't know the definition of Anti-American if it bit you on the ass.
Absolute faith has been shown, consistently, to breed intolerance. And intolerance, history teaches us, again and again, begets violence.
----------------------------------
President George Bush: "Over time the truth will come out."
President George Bush: "Our people are going to find out the truth, and the truth will say that this intelligence was good intelligence. There's no doubt in my mind."
Bush was right. The truth did come out and the facts are he misled Congress and the American people about the reasons we should go to war in Iraq.
posted on August 13, 2005 09:01:26 PM new
logan - Just like you are under the impression that everyone must have the same views as this administration otherwise they are Anti-American.
Again...wrong, wrong, wrong, wrong. I have so many times denied that is true. I have explained over and over and over again that not agreeing with THIS President's policies does NOT....I REPEAT DOES NOT make them anti-American in my eyes.
Other than that....I have nothing to say to you except that when a citizen like you, IF you are a citizen, says they are against our countries foreign policy of not allowing those OUR GOVERNMENT believe to be VERY unstable governments getting nuclear weapons then that, in my eyes, is un-American. The US has agreed with other countries in the world....to do all they can do to keep these terrorists nations from aquiring NW.
And here you are getting all insulted and saying you feel they should be allowed to have them too. You do have a RIGHT to disagree. okay? But it IS un-American to agree
with our enemies....with terrorists who want us dead...with terrorist nations who would destroy us in a second WHEN they're able to do so. It's the saying....you're either with us or you're against us. And you appear to be against us..to me.
I don't know whose side you're on....but it's NOT our side...NOT America's side when it comes to this issue of who should be allowed to have/develop NW.
You wouldn't know the definition of Anti-American if it bit you on the ass.
Sure I do....I read it here often by those of you are the ultra far left/progressive/socialists/further left than even that.
"Whenever the nation is under attack, from within or without, liberals side with the enemy. This is their essence." --Ann Coulter
And why the American Voters chose to RE-elect President Bush to four more years. YES!!!
posted on August 13, 2005 09:04:56 PM new
logan - Was it you who once stated that you would never join our Armed Forces to serve our Nation in time of need?
It was either you or one other male poster here who did make a statement like that. But I can't remember if it was you or someone else.
Mind answering that question?
"Whenever the nation is under attack, from within or without, liberals side with the enemy. This is their essence." --Ann Coulter
And why the American Voters chose to RE-elect President Bush to four more years. YES!!!
posted on August 13, 2005 09:16:49 PM newAgain...wrong, wrong, wrong, wrong. I have so many times denied that is true.
Did you just say Linda: "I can say anything I wish to say..." You can see yourself the way you want. Myself and others her view you differently
So which is it Linda. People are free to say what they want or can't they. Now I am wrong for posting my feelings about your posts and what they represent.
Just like you and your double standards.
I have explained over and over and over again that not agreeing with THIS President's policies does NOT....I REPEAT DOES NOT make them anti-American in my eyes.
That is exactly what I am doing. Disagreeing with this presidents policies. So I guess I am not Anti-American
Linda you don't know whether you are coming or going. I don't even think you know what you believe in. You have your head so far up your FUPA it is not funny.
Absolute faith has been shown, consistently, to breed intolerance. And intolerance, history teaches us, again and again, begets violence.
----------------------------------
President George Bush: "Over time the truth will come out."
President George Bush: "Our people are going to find out the truth, and the truth will say that this intelligence was good intelligence. There's no doubt in my mind."
Bush was right. The truth did come out and the facts are he misled Congress and the American people about the reasons we should go to war in Iraq.
posted on August 13, 2005 10:15:11 PM newI have explained over and over and over again that not agreeing with THIS President's policies does NOT....I REPEAT DOES NOT make them anti-American in my eyes.
posted on August 13, 2005 10:52:54 PM newYou can see yourself the way you want.
Well....LOL....thanks for giving me your permission to do so.
Myself and others her view you differently
Oh, I just worry so much about that....just hoping you'll love me....am I not trying hard enough to win the approval of those who disagree with my political views....because they're so far off the left edge MOST democrats don't agree with them?
So which is it Linda. People are free to say what they want or can't they.
I'm so sorry this is causing you so much distress....because you just don't have the ability to see the difference.
Now I am wrong for posting my feelings about your posts and what they represent.
Wrong for posting your feelings? No. But we weren't talking about your feelings. We were discussing your anti-American views on our foreign policy....that is established by our Congress and voted on to BE OUR NATIONAL POLICY.
Just like you and your double standards.
I have explained over and over and over again that not agreeing with THIS President's policies does NOT....I REPEAT DOES NOT make them anti-American in my eyes.
That is exactly what I am doing. Disagreeing with this presidents policies.
No...you are not ONLY disagreeing with this President....you have openly stated you disagree with AMERICA'S FOREIGN POLICY. And have said you support GOING AGAINST AMERICA'S FOREIGN POLICY....as established by our Congress...and not just THIS Congress.
So I guess I am not Anti-American. You be as confused as you on whether or not you are, logan. It's quite evident to me that you are.
And I will repeat again.....our policy on terrorist nations not obtaining NW...was not a policy made by this administration alone. It has long been our National policy.
"Whenever the nation is under attack, from within or without, liberals side with the enemy. This is their essence." --Ann Coulter
And why the American Voters chose to RE-elect President Bush to four more years. YES!!!
posted on August 13, 2005 11:00:45 PM new
Here you go, logan....read up on just HOW LONG THIS HAS BEEN OUR NATIONAL POLICY.
Probably before you were even born.
Brief Background
The NPT is a landmark international treaty whose objective is to prevent the spread of nuclear weapons and weapons technology, to promote co-operation in the peaceful uses of nuclear energy and to further the goal of achieving nuclear disarmament and general and complete disarmament.
The Treaty represents the only binding commitment in a multilateral treaty to the goal of disarmament by the nuclear-weapon States. Opened for signature in 1968, the Treaty entered into force in 1970.
A total of 187 parties have joined the Treaty, including the five nuclear-weapon States. More countries have ratified the NPT than any other arms limitation and disarmament agreement, a testament to the Treaty's significance.
To further the goal of non-proliferation and as a confidence-building measure between States parties, the Treaty establishes a safeguards system under the responsibility of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA). Safeguards are used to verify compliance with the Treaty through inspections conducted by the IAEA.
The Treaty promotes co-operation in the field of peaceful nuclear technology and equal access to this technology for all States parties, while safeguards prevent the diversion of fissile material for weapons use.
The provisions of the Treaty, particularly article VIII, paragraph 3, envisage a review of the operation of the Treaty every five years, a provision which was reaffirmed by the States parties at the 1995 NPT Review and Extension Conference.
The 2000 Review Conference of the Parties to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT) met at the United Nations in New York from 24 April to 19 May 2000. The Conference was the first to meet following the Treaty's indefinite extension at the 1995 Conference.
States parties examined the implementation of the Treaty's provisions since 1995, taking into account the decisions on the principles and objectives for nuclear non-proliferation and disarmament and the strengthening of the review process for the Treaty as well as the resolution on the Middle East adopted at the 1995 Conference.
ENTRY INTO FORCE: 5 March 1970*
DEPOSITARY GOVERNMENTS:
Russian Federation, United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and the United States of America
TOTAL NUMBER OF PARTIES AS OF March 2002: 187 Parties
____________
*On 11 May 1995, in accordance with article X, paragraph 2, the Review and Extension Conference of the Parties to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons decided that the Treaty should continue in force indefinitely (see Decision 3).
posted on August 13, 2005 11:29:39 PM new
AGAIN....this isn't just a 'Bush' issue nor only a 'problem' he's causing....that YOU'RE disagreeing with....you're disagreeing with most of the WORLD. Buy...hey...you are free to say whatever you want to say. You are free to disagree with MOST OF THE WORLD.
-------
The IAEA Board of Governors has urged Iran to re-establish full suspension of all enrichment related activities and to re-instate the IAEA seals that were removed at its Uranium Conversion Facility in Isfahan, as part of a new resolution it adopted in Vienna this afternoon.
Resolution - Safeguards in Iran [pdf] :: Director General´s Statement :: Full Coverage
http://www.iaea.org/
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"Whenever the nation is under attack, from within or without, liberals side with the enemy. This is their essence." --Ann Coulter
And why the American Voters chose to RE-elect President Bush to four more years. YES!!!
[ edited by Linda_K on Aug 13, 2005 11:34 PM ]
posted on August 14, 2005 05:05:15 AM newHow in the heck did a country like Iran get nuclear technology in the first place????????????
Just like any country that did. First the found the scientists and physicists and then they located the materials to build.
Absolute faith has been shown, consistently, to breed intolerance. And intolerance, history teaches us, again and again, begets violence.
----------------------------------
President George Bush: "Over time the truth will come out."
President George Bush: "Our people are going to find out the truth, and the truth will say that this intelligence was good intelligence. There's no doubt in my mind."
Bush was right. The truth did come out and the facts are he misled Congress and the American people about the reasons we should go to war in Iraq.
posted on August 14, 2005 05:25:27 AM newWrong for posting your feelings? No. But we weren't talking about your feelings. We were discussing your anti-American views on our foreign policy....that is established by our Congress and voted on to BE OUR NATIONAL POLICY.
Linda you are a psycho. Again show me where in the Constitution where it says an American needs to agree with the policies and views of this government. It doesn't. In fact the first amendment allows me to speak out against the government and have different views/feelings/opinions.
I have explained over and over and over again that not agreeing with THIS President's policies does NOT....I REPEAT DOES NOT make them anti-American in my eyes.
Buy...hey...you are free to say whatever you want to say. You are free to disagree with MOST OF THE WORLD.
More of your remarks that need * by them.
Whether I disagree with Bush's policies, Clinton's policies or George Washington's policies, it does not mean I am Anti-American. Or do you want to change your definitions again. Linda you are trying to ride both sides of the fence.
So you still never answered my question and what countries should be able to have nuclear weapons and why they should have them.
But it IS un-American to agree with our enemies....with terrorists who want us dead...with terrorist nations who would destroy us in a second WHEN they're able to do so.
This is more of your first grade logic, Linda. If A=B and B=C then A=C.
In no shape or form does not agreeing with something translate into someone siding with the enemy. Please point out where one person here has sided with the terrorists. I do not think you will find. Your extreme nationalism does not set policy for this country, so you can keep trying to shove your cheerleading and propaganda down everyone's throats.
Absolute faith has been shown, consistently, to breed intolerance. And intolerance, history teaches us, again and again, begets violence.
----------------------------------
President George Bush: "Over time the truth will come out."
President George Bush: "Our people are going to find out the truth, and the truth will say that this intelligence was good intelligence. There's no doubt in my mind."
Bush was right. The truth did come out and the facts are he misled Congress and the American people about the reasons we should go to war in Iraq.
[ edited by logansdad on Aug 14, 2005 05:46 AM ]
[ edited by logansdad on Aug 14, 2005 10:06 AM ]
posted on August 14, 2005 05:43:03 AM new "But it IS un-American to agree with our enemies....with terrorists who want us dead."
Linda, How absolutely absurd to think that disagreement with BUSH policy indicates agreement with terrorists.
The devoted and unwavering fervor with which you worship Bush is sick. He is not a God. He is an incompetent president surrounded and directed by by crooks and liars. Just look at the reams of FRANTIC attempts that you have made in this thread alone to call everyone anti-American who disagrees with BUSH policy....a policy which is leading to World War lll by a president who is a danger to the entire world.
Your radical stance, advocating the dictatorial repression of all opposition and extreme nationalism describes the ideology of a Fascist.
posted on August 14, 2005 06:24:09 AM new This is a very good article from the Power and Interest News Report explaining Iran's Motives for Nuclear Arms.
"If Iran were to acquire a nuclear capability, it is unfounded to assume that it would use these weapons in a manner other than regime survival or as a foreign policy leverage tool. Indeed, those states opposed to Iranian interests -- such as the United States and Israel -- need not fear an Iranian nuclear first strike unless they put Tehran into a position where it would face regime termination."
posted on August 14, 2005 06:42:21 AM newHe is an incompetent president surrounded and directed by by crooks and liars..
No Helen, he is the President of the United States and a world leader, that whether you like it or not, was re-elected to office by the citizens of this country.
posted on August 14, 2005 06:57:15 AM new
Presidents and world leaders are judged by their accomplishments, not by the fact --- or in Bush's case, the lie that he was "elected".
I don't intend to get into a pissing match with you on that score, however. This thread is about Iran and the fact that Bush is about to screw up once again.
posted on August 14, 2005 08:08:27 AM new
::We were discussing your anti-American views on our foreign policy....that is established by our Congress and voted on to BE OUR NATIONAL POLICY.::
Linda - If disagreeing with a national policy is your definition of being anti-american you need to swipe yourself with that broad brush of yours. Wasn't it just two days ago that you were complaining about the policy that places the responsibility for dealing with illegal immigrants in the hands of the INS and keeps it out of the hands of the police?
~~~ • ~~~ • ~~~ • ~~~ • ~~~
No, I'm saying -- I'm merely -- I'm saying what I'm saying. I don't know why I'm always having people say, are you trying to say -- you know what you can do if you want to know what I'm saying is listen to what I'm saying. What I'm saying is what I said ...
posted on August 14, 2005 08:13:56 AM new
:ther than that....I have nothing to say to you except that when a citizen like you, IF you are a citizen,::
If Logan is not going to ask I am... why are you implying Linda?
~~~ • ~~~ • ~~~ • ~~~ • ~~~
No, I'm saying -- I'm merely -- I'm saying what I'm saying. I don't know why I'm always having people say, are you trying to say -- you know what you can do if you want to know what I'm saying is listen to what I'm saying. What I'm saying is what I said ...
posted on August 14, 2005 09:00:02 AM new
She's saying that it's okay for her to disagree with some policies, but it's not okay for the rest of us. She's still American and we are not. What a hypocrit.
If being an American means that I have to agree with every policy and every action taken by the government, than I'm proud to say I'm not an American. If it means I have to turn a blind eye on every comment or threat made by the Bush puppy dogs, than I'm proud to say I am not an American. If it means I have to be like Linda_K and the rest of the neocons on this board than, hel* yes, I'm proud to say I'm not an American. Because that will be the day where freedom dies. And when freedom dies, so does America.
BTW, I didn't agree with everything Clinton did, either.
posted on August 14, 2005 10:11:00 AM new
See Linda I am not the only that can see through your double standards.
Linda - If disagreeing with a national policy is your definition of being anti-american you need to swipe yourself with that broad brush of yours. Wasn't it just two days ago that you were complaining about the policy that places the responsibility for dealing with illegal immigrants in the hands of the INS and keeps it out of the hands of the police?
Nicely said fenix.
Linda: I have nothing to say to you except that when a citizen like you,
So Linda is it still OK for others to disagree about the laws and policies of this country or is it just OK for you to censor what others say and for you to say what you want to say.
Absolute faith has been shown, consistently, to breed intolerance. And intolerance, history teaches us, again and again, begets violence.
----------------------------------
President George Bush: "Over time the truth will come out."
President George Bush: "Our people are going to find out the truth, and the truth will say that this intelligence was good intelligence. There's no doubt in my mind."
Bush was right. The truth did come out and the facts are he misled Congress and the American people about the reasons we should go to war in Iraq.
posted on August 14, 2005 10:40:50 AM new
After all the things you liberals here have called this President....and you're getting upset because I see those who NEVER agree with any U.S. policies and always those policies set by our WHOLE government, [being what's been decided by our present and past Congress']....I find that laughable.
And fenix....you too aren't seeing the difference. While you defend your comrads here....I have never called you anti-American even though you, the profe, dbl, Ron, parklane, maggie and probably others who oppose some/all of this administration's policies whose names I'm forgetting rarely agree with my positions. WHY would that be? Because I don't see your posts that way. I just see them as disagreement.....not ALL anti-American policy.
Thick heads here don't get that anyone can speak out against anything they wish too. And so can I. And I can call a spade a spade.
-------------------
cheryl gives another Bible quote...how sweet. Yet she's the one whose always whining about 'the Bible being stuffed down her throat.
You reap what you sow....she says. Yes, and he has, cheryl. He was re-elected.
"Whenever the nation is under attack, from within or without, liberals side with the enemy. This is their essence." --Ann Coulter
And why the American Voters chose to RE-elect President Bush to four more years. YES!!!
posted on August 14, 2005 10:58:43 AM newI have never called you anti-American even though you, the profe, dbl, Ron, parklane, maggie and probably others who oppose some/all of this administration's policies whose names I'm forgetting rarely agree with my positions. WHY would that be? Because I don't see your posts that way. I just see them as disagreement.....not ALL anti-American policy.
So now Linda what constitutes the difference between "disagreement in a post" and being Anti-American. You show me how disagreeing with a policy is aiding and helping terrorists. Next you are going to say that amounts to treason.
NOT America's side when it comes to this issue of who should be allowed to have/develop NW.
Another very arrogant comment made by Linda. Since the US is a "superpower", Linda believes the US should have free reign to do what it pleases. So why is it Linda you believe no other country should have nuclear weapons expect the US?
You believe a country's ruler should do what it necessary to protect their country's interests and make sure their people are safe. So if a country's ruler feels it is necessary to defend their homeland by posessing nuclear weapons, they should be able to do so, right.
If Ireland or Iceland wanted nuclear weapons they should be able to build them right?
Absolute faith has been shown, consistently, to breed intolerance. And intolerance, history teaches us, again and again, begets violence.
----------------------------------
President George Bush: "Over time the truth will come out."
President George Bush: "Our people are going to find out the truth, and the truth will say that this intelligence was good intelligence. There's no doubt in my mind."
Bush was right. The truth did come out and the facts are he misled Congress and the American people about the reasons we should go to war in Iraq.
posted on August 14, 2005 11:37:29 AM new
Pi - it's not as if it is a country of camel hearder living in tents. They have universities, hospitals and their very own uranium mines. Something that seems to have been obscured in all of the mania is that Iran is not trying to build nuclear weapons facilities... They are trying to build power plants to better serve their people.
I can see where it's not neccesarily in the best interest of all for Iran to have nukes (although lets be honest, the threat of nukes is what kept us from going to war with Russia for so long) I'm not quite surte where we get the right to deny electricity to them.
~~~ • ~~~ • ~~~ • ~~~ • ~~~
No, I'm saying -- I'm merely -- I'm saying what I'm saying. I don't know why I'm always having people say, are you trying to say -- you know what you can do if you want to know what I'm saying is listen to what I'm saying. What I'm saying is what I said ...
posted on August 14, 2005 08:03:26 PM new
"I am glad while working I check in here a couple times a day. I get my laughs that way"
if you got the time to come in here a couple of times a day while working,you must have an important job....is Walmarts giving out laptops to their greeters??
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Golfer:Stop checking your watch all the time,its too much of a distraction.
Caddy:Its not a watch, its a compass
posted on August 14, 2005 08:22:11 PM new
Did anyone else notice that LindaTwelveK can't defend bush any longer so is resorting to just wetting her pants about him being "elected".. That's all the old bag's got
posted on August 14, 2005 08:57:32 PM new
Please disregard any statement made by logan AS HE DOESN'T SPEAK FOR ME.
Other than that...in his statement below....I sure don't see it as being PRO-AMERICA. Not one tiny bit. I have faith that there are people who DO have the ability to see the difference between American policy made DECADES AGO....vs....anything this administration is doing. But, of course, they LOVE blaming President Bush just for being alive and breathing.
--
"Another very arrogant comment made by Linda. Since the US is a "superpower", Linda believes the US should have free reign to do what it pleases. So why is it Linda you believe no other country should have nuclear weapons expect the US?
You believe a country's ruler should do what it necessary to protect their country's interests and make sure their people are safe. So if a country's ruler feels it is necessary to defend their homeland by posessing nuclear weapons, they should be able to do so, right.
------------
Again....logansdad does NOT speak anything but LIES when he speaks for me.
"Whenever the nation is under attack, from within or without, liberals side with the enemy. This is their essence." --Ann Coulter
And why the American Voters chose to RE-elect President Bush to four more years. YES!!!
posted on August 14, 2005 10:15:34 PM new
::fenix - Are you saying that you too agree Iran should be allowed to develop nuclear weapons?::
I can actually see both sides of it and am undecided. But that's not the point right now, the issue is whether or not they should be allowed to continue the work on their nuclear power plants and the answer is yes. The fact that they have oil is irrelevent Linda. Nuclear power is a cleaner, less expensive and more efficient method and I'm sorry but we don't have the right to tell them that they cannot utilize technology which is in the best interest of their people. We should not be negotiating their right to have nuclear power because I think it gives the radical element still another reason to hate the West. We should be negotiating a level of consistant on site oversight within the plant.
~~~ • ~~~ • ~~~ • ~~~ • ~~~
An intelligent deaf-mute is better than an ignorant person who can speak.
ther than that....I have nothing to say to you except that when a citizen like you, IF you are a citizen,::