Posted: Sun Aug 13, 2006 4:50 pm
Well, I dislike media coverage as much as you do. I will wait on history to tell me if political figures are playing this up too much. It is frankly too early to tell. And sure the media is playing it up to an insane degree, it makes me ill.Nalian wrote:Alright - you started the conversation speaking about the war on terrorism without specifying that you only wanted it to be about one single line. But if thats how you want to play it - fine.swatter555 wrote:As far as facts, I was refering to the history discussion.Nalian wrote:Which time - when you call people who disagree foreigners? Or is it when you won't watch something that makes a point then comment on it without seeing it?swatter555 wrote: I can back up anything I said in this thread with volumes of hard facts. If facts don't sit well with you, I suppose an ad hominem attack is your last resort.
You also stated I said Bush was THE source of terror in this world - a statement I never made. This makes me think your reading comprehension leaves something to be desired. Terror is by its very definition an overhwelming sense of fear. That is something that many people have admitted in my presence, written articles on the web, and gone on national TV and said that they have serious concerns and yes, great fears, over what our administration is doing with its wars, and the way it handles its foreign policy. Just because you disagree does not mean that it is any less true. You may think feeling that way is dumb - but thats your personal opinion, not fact.
As to the rest of the disagreement with you, it doesnt even relate to this thread. I was talking about terrorism and Islam. You then say that the media and the administration are the biggest sources of terror. That is exactly the type of debate I will not enter into, not here at least.
If you have something to contribute as to the discussion at hand, then feel free to contribute.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/14320452/ - looks like it wasn't an imminent threat anymore than everything else thats being planned on the world is imminent. British police knew who these folks where and at what stages in planning they were at. They wanted to surveil them for a few more weeks - the US wanted them arrested now. Then they come on TV and tell us that we narrowly missed having bunches of planes blown up and "unimaginable loss of life" was averted. They don't mention the fact that it wasn't set to happen that day and they don't know when.
I'm not saying they shouldn't have arrested them - I'm saying that they shouldn't go on TV and be like "look at what almost happened - TODAY!!!*#(!&@!" when it wouldn't have been today, and they knew it. Just tell us the truth! We'll still be happy that they were arrested!
Instead they lie and raise the terror alert level.
Apparently it wasn't a foiled
I believe the terror alert level was raised because they believed there were several people still loose and able to perform their mission. Frankly, if it had gone differently and if the level wasnt raised and an attack did occur, they would be roasted for doing nothing. It is often a lose-lose situation, especially when so many people are suspicious of the current govts in the US and UK.