"Archie forced Jasmine's 9-year-old brother Jacorey to watch the attack and "told him that if he shed a tear that she was going to kill him, too," Cotton testified."

Oh damn, those poor kids.

I say we do the "system" a favor and run her over after she is found guilty.

Depends on your definition of U.S. soil. I consider US soil to be, as most people around the world, any locations within the geographical US, military installations, and diplomatic facilities. That said, there were were at least 10 incidents that meet the above criteria. There were several more involving either direct attacks on U.S. citizens or at random. I counted at least 2 within the geographical confines of the US - one was a Palestinian shooting people at the Empire State Building and one was letter bombs sent to a NY newspaper from Alexandria.

True, but the context of what we are discussing is "keeping terror from here at home"..."keeping the fight over there'"

Also, we'd be remiss to ignore the massacre in OKC in 1995. Not foreign, but some truly misguided souls there.

Hm, Columbine 1999? Was that "terrorism" as well?
Interesting how the definition can expand or contract.

Let's see...

1986 - Berlin Disco.
1988 - Lockerbie.
1993 - Shootings outside CIA Headquarters (5 days into Clinton's Admin)

So why didn't Reagan and Bush 41 do enough to prevent anything?

You also forgot to add the 1993 bombing of the World Trade Center. That was foreign terorists as well.

I never said there were no acts of terrorism during those administrations. Some of the car combings in the middle east at that time that were done by radio control could have been prevented had the advice of a few SEALs been heeded. They wanted to install transmitters on the various US buildings that would broadcast across the spectrum and detonate the bombs before they reached their target. The liberals didn't want to have bombs going off around civilians and so they nixed the idea. And why do you think that acts of terrorism can be prevented? They can't be. There are always going to be individuals who think they can change national policy by attacking citizens. The best you can hope for is to make the price of supporting these non-state actors too high. Libya felt it in '86, Afghanistan felt it in '01, Iraq in '03. Just as Japan realized it went one step too far in '41, perhaps those supporting terrorism will realize the consequences of pushing us.

My son...

myself...

and a few thousand other people were there.

Poor kid didn't have a choice huh? They still lost. Better luck with a better candidate next time. Maybe we should keep the kiddies away from FU signs and slogans? Don't they get enough of that in RAP songs?
Oh, First Amendment, Gatta love it.

Kinda like those kids at the pro-life protests?

You know I have been hearing this same lame-brained argument since the beginning of the war. There are several things wrong with it.

1) The argument is rooted in elitism. Many that float it think the people of the region are to stupid to rule themselves. This is of course true racism. It comes from the same racist leftists in America that think blacks can't take care of themselves without the evil white man helping them out and treating them like children.

2) We are not making them America II. Their government will not be like ours. It will be theirs. They will create their own constitution and laws. The interim government is not even like ours.

3) This is not diplomacy. This is a war.

4) The people in Iraq want to vote. Recent polls showed that 80% were likely to turn out to vote, DESPITE the threat of violence. The Iraqis want to rule themselves.

5) This has worked many times in the past. Japan is probably the best example. Turkey and Afghanistan would be two others that come to mind. We have fought to free many peoples from evil men, and the fact is they have pretty much all wanted to be free to govern themselves.

We have dealt with terrorists trying to derail elections before. The same thing happened then that will happen Sunday. The people will risk everything to exercise their freedom.

Don't mind him. He isn't for either party. He is your average hypocrite American communist. He lives in a nice house, drives a fancy car, and is quite the consumer. Of course he wants the rest of us to give up all the stuff we have for the good of the proletariate. :rolleyes:

OR The pro-choice protests? Disturbing to watch them teach garbage to kids and wonder why they hate later on in life. Give the phsycologists something to do I guess.

Frontier, if you're ever in Phoenix, I'd be honored if you'd let me buy you a beer.

Been a while since we have heard from the resident commie. Which psychopath group were you marching with Xterrapin? Atleast you are surrounding your kid with good role models such as yourself.

:rolleyes:

We started at Malcolm X park with the D.A.W.N. rally (approx ten-thousand people; police estimates) and ended the march at the "White" House where the Anarchists, ANSWER and the Pink Bloc ended their marches. From there, we went inside the secured area and observed the parade. Great fun, great (but cold) day!
The psychopath was the lady in the mink coat and the bling-bling "W" pin that punched my wife in the gut (no joke); thank you very much.

Don't mind him. He isn't for either party. He is your average hypocrite American communist.

Hey Ward Cleaver, you spelled that wrong; it's "AmeriKKKa! Dumbass redneck, date raping, wife beating, insecure, goat fucking robot.

That was constructive. :rolleyes:

I loved the post full of quotes. Here's one for you:

We had a good discussion, the Foreign Minister and I and the President and I, had a good discussion about the nature of the sanctions -- the fact that the sanctions exist -- not for the purpose of hurting the Iraqi people, but for the purpose of keeping in check Saddam Hussein's ambitions toward developing weapons of mass destruction. We should constantly be reviewing our policies, constantly be looking at those sanctions to make sure that they are directed toward that purpose. That purpose is every bit as important now as it was ten years ago when we began it. And frankly they have worked. He has not developed any significant capability with respect to weapons of mass destruction. He is unable to project conventional power against his neighbors.

Secretary of State Colin Powell, Feb. 24, 2001.

You can say anything you want when you quote what others have already said.

I should have drove up there... just to laugh at you guys. Do you have any clue how comical you look? Seriously, what are you going to accomplish by marching in the streets with cardboard signs? All you guys are doing is tearing a divide in this nation, and showing the rest of the world how disrespectful you are towards our elected leader, makes you look real immature... or even French.

But that's ok, I am sure you.. and your little whistle got allot accomplished, I mean...the President will listen to people dressed as bumbs, blowing whistles chanting all kinds of clever slogans. :rolleyes:

Once again:

One way or the other, we are determined to deny Iraq the capacity to develop weapons of mass destruction and the missiles to deliver them. that is our bottom line." - President Clinton, Feb. 4, 1998

"If Saddam rejects peace and we have to use force, our purpose is clear. We want to seriously diminish the threat posed by Iraq's weapons of mass destruction program." - President Clinton, Feb. 17, 1998

"Iraq is a long way from [here], but what happens there matters a great deal here. For the risks that the leaders of a rogue state will use nuclear, chemical or biological weapons against us or our allies is the greatest security threat we face." - Madeline Albright, Feb 18, 1998
"He will use those weapons of mass destruction again, as he has ten times since 1983." - Sandy Berger, Clinton National Security Adviser, Feb,18,1998

"We urge you, after consulting with Congress, and consistent with the U.S.Constitution and laws, to take necessary actions (including, if appropriate,air and missile strikes on suspect Iraqi sites) to respond effectively to the threat posed by Iraq's refusal to end its weapons of mass destruction programs." - Letter to President Clinton, signed by Sens.Carl Levin (D-MI),Tom Daschle (D-SD), John Kerry( D - MA), and others Oct. 9, 1998

"Saddam Hussein has been engaged in the development of weapons of mass destruction technology which is a threat to countries in the region and he has made a mockery of the weapons inspection process." - Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D, CA), Dec. 16, 1998

"Hussein has ... chosen to spend his money on building weapons of mass destruction and palaces for his cronies." Madeline Albright, Clinton Secretary of State, Nov. 10, 1999

"There is no doubt that ... Saddam Hussein has invigorated his weapons programs. Reports indicate that biological, chemical and nuclear programs continue apace and may be back to pre-Gulf War status. In addition, Saddam continues to redefine delivery systems and is doubtless using the cover of an illicit missile program to develop longer-range missiles that will threaten the United States and our allies." Letter to President Bush, Signed by Sen. Bob Graham (D, FL,) and others, December 5, 2001

"We begin with the common belief that Saddam Hussein is a tyrant and threat to the peace and stability of the region. He has ignored the mandate of the United Nations and is building weapons of mass destruction and the means of delivering them." - Sen. Carl Levin (D, MI), Sept. 19, 2002

"We know that he has stored secret supplies of biological and chemical weapons throughout his country." - Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002
"Iraq's search for weapons of mass destruction has proven impossible to deter and we should assume that it will continue for as long as Saddam is in power." - Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002

"We have known for many years that Saddam Hussein is seeking and developing weapons of mass destruction." Sen. Ted Kennedy (D, MA), Sept. 27, 2002

"The last UN weapons inspectors left Iraq in October of 1998. We are confident that Saddam Hussein retains some stockpiles of chemical and biological weapons, and that he has since embarked on a crash course to build up his chemical and biological warfare capabilities. Intelligence reports indicate that he is seeking nuclear weapons..." - Sen. Robert Byrd (D, WV), Oct. 3, 2002

"I will be voting to give the President of the United States the authority to use force-- if necessary-- to disarm Saddam Hussein because I believe that a deadly arsenal of weapons of mass destruction in his hands is a real and grave threat to our security." - Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Oct. 9, 2002.

"There is unmistakable evidence that Saddam Hussein is working aggressively to develop nuclear weapons and will likely have nuclear weapons within the next five years . We also should remember we have always underestimated the progress Saddam has made in development of weapons of mass destruction- - Sen. Jay Rockefeller (D, WV), Oct 10, 2002

"He has systematically violated, over the course of the past 11 years, every significant UN resolution that has demanded that he disarm and destroys his chemical and biological weapons, and any nuclear capacity. This he has refused to do" - Rep. Henry Waxman (D, CA), Oct. 10, 2002

"In the four years since the inspectors left, intelligence reports show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and biological weapons stock, his missile delivery capability, and his nuclear program. He has also given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to terrorists, including al Qaeda members. It is clear, however, that if left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will continue to increase his capacity to wage biological and chemical warfare,and will keep trying to develop nuclear weapons." - Sen. Hillary Clinton (D,NY), Oct 10, 2002

"We are in possession of what I think to be compelling evidence that Saddam Hussein has, and has had for a number of years, a developing capacity for the production and storage of weapons of mass destruction." - Sen. Bob Graham (D, FL), Dec. 8, 2002

"Without question, we need to disarm Saddam Hussein. He is a brutal, murderous dictator, leading an oppressive regime . He presents a particularly grievous threat because he is so consistently prone to miscalculation .. And now he is miscalculating America's response to his continued deceit and his consistent grasp for weapons of mass destruction. ... So the threat of Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real" - Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Jan. 23. 2003

I think if we're going to put quotes from people in our posts, we should also list the website they're copied and pasted from. Otherwise, what's the point?

I have to say that it surprises me, but I have to say that I am sorry about that. Usually the unreasonable psychos are on the left, but we have ours also. She may have been motivated by all the comunists, anarchists, flag burners, US hating idiots around here. Either way, no excuse for punching your wife.

I especially like the BUSH:A MOTHERFUCKER sign. I am sure that influenced some people to your cause who werent already firmly entrenched. Politics is persuasion, you guys are persuading no one.

Xterrapin, sorry to hear your wife was punched. Thats just not right.

Sounds like I hit a nerve with the truth there. When you crossing the border?

This illustrates perfectly how the left reacts when you call them on their shallow bullshit.