Stumble It!
It's Baack! I found an article written over at a place called "Truth Here." Which is so funny considering there is nothing truthful out there! This guy is obviously full of himself. The most recent article, and the topic of this week's discussion that earns him The BoBo of The Week Award is dated April 20, 2008. Based on what I read, perhaps someone took him out!
The title of his post is "Freedom of Speech May Not But NOT Speaking." Does anyone else see something wrong with this title? For someone that is supposed to be talking about speech, he obviously has not grasped the English language himself. Just what the hell is he trying to say anyway?
Alright, let's get down to what drew my ire and attention - I often heard people quoting other people or heard about these kinds of people on the radio or newspaper, but I have never actually come across someone who openly made the following statement:
"...it should be clear that if we are also being threatened and attacked non-stop by Islamic radicals, as Dr. Roth says, then it is only ourselves that need be blamed."
And that is just in his opening paragraph. He consistently calls our attacks on Iraq in both instances as "invasions." Why is it that the far loony left considers us as invaders and occupiers? These guys kill me and piss me off to no end. Forget the fact that the first war really only lasted about 40 days and yet he states:
During the first Gulf War, the estimates by our generals of the number of Iraqi soldiers killed were from 50,000 to 200,000.This guy obviously has never heard of a Battle Damage Assessment (BDA). I think our military knows exactly how to conduct a BDA that will yield a body count a helluva lot closer than a 150,000 spread. Secondly, if we managed to kill 50,000 - 200,000 soldiers in a 40 day period without using major ordinance, we truly are the most powerful nation in the world! I'd like to know where he got those figures. I conducted a google search and this is the closest thing I could find with those kinds of numbers from a USA Today chronology http://www.usatoday.com/news/index/iraq/nirq050.htm
Brig. Gen. Richard Neal in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia, says Iraqi forces are in "full retreat" with allied forces pursuing; Iraqi POWs number 30,000-plus, number to climb to 63,000.and this from a Post-Gazette article dated February 16, 2003 and titled "Estimates of deaths in first war still in dispute":
Estimates by experts at the National Defense University in Washington, D.C., at the International Institute for Strategic Studies in London, and by an air power survey headed by Johns Hopkins University Prof. Eliot Cohen put the number of Iraqi soldiers killed at 20,000 to 25,000, and the number of civilian deaths at 1,000 to 3,000. The Iraqi government claims 2,278 civilians were killed during the war.Wow - that's a huge difference than what this guy is quoting! That's the other thing that really pisses me off about the anti-war crowd - they just make up their freakin' numbers without doing any actual research and then it just propagates across the Internet because no one is willing to look up the real facts!
And - it get's better - or worse - depending on how you look at it. Here's what he says next:
Why would it surprise any mature adult that many of the Islamic people are angry with the US government? To put it another way, how would we feel if 5% of Americans had been killed over a fifteen year period by a country that was supposed to be helping us? How would we feel if another country,s military invaded our country, damaged and destroyed many of our buildings, caused 20% of the people to flee their homes, destroyed most of our water supplies, removed our police, allowed tremendous chaos, wrote a new Constitution for us, and said they are giving us a better way of life?
Really? Which Islamic people would you be talking about? The millions of Iraqi's who have openly acknowledged their thanks and greatfullness to the U.S. and the other coalition forced for liberating them? Or, did you mean the Islamic terrorists who hate all Americans and all westerners because we don't worship a pedophile prophet?
Where did you come up with the fact that the U.S. has killed 5% of the entire Islamic population over a 15 year period? Are you perhaps just meaning 5% of the Iraqi population? Really? Even if this is what you meant, where did you come up with that figure? Also, are you trying to insinuate that the entire Iraqi population is Islamic? Well, for your information, 5% of the entire Iraqi population is Christian as reported in this June 2007 letter to President Bush: Congresswoman Eshoo urges Bush, Congressional members to protect Iraq's Christian population. Is this where you got the 5% number? Also, you stated it caused 20% of the population to leave their homes. In that same letter, it specifically states that as many as 2 million people have fled Iraq since 2003. In this 2008 report CIA-The World Factbook-Iraq, in July 2008 there were over 28 million people still living in Iraq. So, if you add the 2 million back in for a total of 30 million, that means that less than 10% of the actual population has fled. Additionally, you need to look at the demographics of the population that have left - which the vast majority tend to be those who supported Saddam Hussein and his government. Those who are left want democracy and welcome our support in their country to rebuild it. Again, your argument and your numbers are all false!
For someone who's blog is titled "Truth Here" you sure do lie a lot! Here's another little tidbit he throws at us:
WE are the country doing the bulk of the demonizing, terrorizing and killing. We are the ones who are terrorizing 27 million Iraqi, 31 million Afghani and now we,re beating the war drums against 65 million Iranians. We are the ones who are earning their hatred!Again, look at the language used here. This guy must really hate our country, government, and our troops for him to imply that WE are the terrorists. Again, I would like to know why he thinks the Iraqi's and Afghani's hate us when it is in fact just the opposite. The only one's in Iraq and Afghanistan who hate the U.S. are the terrorist and insurgents that we are hunting down and killing. In fact, there have been reports - too numerous to link here but are well documented if you just do your own google search - where locals are turning the terrorists and insurgents over to American forces and local police.
As far as Iran goes - again - it is not the Iranian people who hate the U.S. In fact, they love us over there. They hate their own theocratic leaders. Again, do your own google search - there are probably hundreds of thousands of instances to be found where it is reported that the Iranian people are pro-America. The only one's in Iran who hate us are their leaders.
This next line has got to be the funniest thing I've ever read:
We can control the UN enough so that they get no aid and have sanctions placed against them.He's referencing us controlling middle-eastern Muslims as a whole. There is no discern in his paragraph regarding terrorists. He lumps them all in to one category as if the U.S. and the rest of the Western civilization are against the ENTIRE middle-east and Muslims in particular. I don't think I need to go in to detail with regards to the statement. That's just plain funny!
I'm just going to quote a couple more paragraphs here. The remainder of his discussion surrounds the 9/11 attack and the fact that he is denying that we were in fact attacked by terrorists. He wants proof. You will have to go read this entire post yourself. Anyway, I just wanted to leave you guys with these last two paragraphs:
The FBI says Bin Laden is not wanted for the 9/11 catastrophe because they have no evidence linking him to it. Ø The BBC has already learned from CIA officials that Al Qaeda is just a propaganda creation to allow the Bush Administration to go to war. Ø Perhaps, most damning of all questions that don,t support Islam attacking us is why did the World Trade Center buildings collapse?
- If these statements are true, then they force us into a flood of thoughtful questions and I,ll ask just the first two resoundingly painful and damning ones. First, if the FBI says there is no evidence for Bin Laden orchestrating the attacks on 9/11, then why did we invade Afghanistan to get him? And second, if Al Qaeda does not exist, then why did we invade Iraq to stop them from supporting Al Qaeda?
Top Stories
|