quote:

Originally posted by DigiNut In case you hadn't noticed, they'd been recruiting people to carry out missions in the US since before the Cold War, so this isn't actually news.

That statement is definitely news to me. Elaborate please??

quote:

Originally posted by ravr Go watch Sicko

Ah, so you're a Michael Moore fan. Yep, we're done here.

quote:

Originally posted by infinity HiGH That statement is definitely news to me. Elaborate please??

Here's a quick fact sheet for you:

http://www.simplytaty.com/broadenpages/terrorism.htm

Terrorist acts against the USA (both in the USA and against Americans abroad) have been making headlines for a while. They did heat up somewhat in the mid-90's during the Clinton administration, not that he caused them, just responded very weakly to them, and cut the intelligence budget which made them harder to prevent.

Here's a much more scholarly article, written in 1996, long before 9/11 or the so-called war on terror, which talks about the history of domestic terrorism in the USA, including religiously-motivated terrorism:

http://www.fas.org/irp/eprint/presley.htm

See if that interests you. There's plenty more where that came from.

___________________
My party schedule:
2009-02-21 - DJ Attention @ I'm So Popular
2009-06-18 - DJ Annoying @ People Need To Know Where I'll Be
2012-11-32 - DJ Insufferable ɸ Or At Least the Stalkers I Complain About
2048-06-66 - Spastic & Whocares ¶ Although I'm Actually Flattered
9999-45-81 - Tweaker Gimp ☼ I Probably Won't Even Go To This But I Have To Make Sure I Fill Up All The Available Space Here

quote:

Originally posted by DigiNut Here's a quick fact sheet for you: http://www.simplytaty.com/broadenpages/terrorism.htm Terrorist acts against the USA (both in the USA and against Americans abroad) have been making headlines for a while. They did heat up somewhat in the mid-90's during the Clinton administration, not that he caused them, just responded very weakly to them, and cut the intelligence budget which made them harder to prevent. Here's a much more scholarly article, written in 1996, long before 9/11 or the so-called war on terror, which talks about the history of domestic terrorism in the USA, including religiously-motivated terrorism: http://www.fas.org/irp/eprint/presley.htm See if that interests you. There's plenty more where that came from.

I'm taking a course on Terrorism right now so this'll definitely come in handy for my essay. Thanks. When you said "they" I thought you meant that Al Qaeda (who didn't exist before the Cold War) was recruiting since before the Cold War. But yes, I agree, there has been anti-US, religious based terrorism for a long long time.

A course on terrorism eh... I'm scared to ask what you're being taught.

For the record, no, of course not all of the terrorism throughout the past few decades has been Al-Qaeda. If that was somehow implied, then consider it my error. A lot of it has been by Shiite or Sunni Muslims though. Al-Qaeda is probably the biggest terrorist group operating internationally today (I don't have a source for that), though there are many others like Hezbollah, Al-Aqsa, and so on.

___________________
My party schedule:
2009-02-21 - DJ Attention @ I'm So Popular
2009-06-18 - DJ Annoying @ People Need To Know Where I'll Be
2012-11-32 - DJ Insufferable ɸ Or At Least the Stalkers I Complain About
2048-06-66 - Spastic & Whocares ¶ Although I'm Actually Flattered
9999-45-81 - Tweaker Gimp ☼ I Probably Won't Even Go To This But I Have To Make Sure I Fill Up All The Available Space Here

quote:

Originally posted by DigiNut A course on terrorism eh... I'm scared to ask what you're being taught. For the record, no, of course not all of the terrorism throughout the past few decades has been Al-Qaeda. If that was somehow implied, then consider it my error. A lot of it has been by Shiite or Sunni Muslims though. Al-Qaeda is probably the biggest terrorist group operating internationally today (I don't have a source for that), though there are many others like Hezbollah, Al-Aqsa, and so on.

I think Hezbollah would be biggest, but then again, no source. Just opinion I guess.

ha, alqaeda, terrorism....

watch this movie before you talk, part 2 and 3, part 1 talks about religion


Zeitgeist Movie on Google Video

[[ LINK REMOVED ]]



sources:
http://www.zeitgeistmovie.com/sources.htm

quote:

Originally posted by DigiNut Ah, so you're a Michael Moore fan. Yep, we're done here.

Great rebuttal, Einstein!

quote:

Originally posted by ravr Great rebuttal, Einstein!

While I kind of respect Michael Moore for his intent to show things to people from a different perspective, he has a tendencey to manipulate and twist facts around to fit his point. I'd by no means take his movies as the ultimate truth or even as a great source of information.

quote:

Originally posted by infinity HiGH While I kind of respect Michael Moore for his intent to show things to people from a different perspective, he has a tendencey to manipulate and twist facts around to fit his point. I'd by no means take his movies as the ultimate truth or even as a great source of information.

Anyone who takes Moore's opinions at face value as truth, or consider him an expert on anything is quite silly.

___________________
Latest mix: Yohan - Full Spectrum (Fall 14 promo)
Like my stuff? Join my FB group here!

quote:

Originally posted by chinamon not true. i say "ugh" but i am a tranny.

quote:

Originally posted by kotsy lol colour me retarded

quote:

Originally posted by infinity HiGH I think Hezbollah would be biggest, but then again, no source. Just opinion I guess.

You could very well be right. I don't think they've ever been caught operating *in* the USA or Canada, but in the middle east they're huge. They're essentially the de facto government in Syria and Lebanon.

For anybody who likes conspiracy theories about Illuminati and other secretive organizations in the upper echelons of government, look no further than the Hezb, who comprise - I think I remember reading this - 60-70% of the ruling political parties in those states?

Oh, and as for Moore - there is just one thing I respect about him, which is that he openly admits that his films are biased and says straight up that there should be Conservative filmmakers doing the same thing (not that Hollyweird would ever give them a budget or even airtime).

Michael Moore is not really a bad guy, as long as you view him in the light of an entertainer rather than a researcher. He knows his audience well and he plays to that. Using him as a reference in a debate, though, makes about as much sense as using Rush Limbaugh as a reference.

___________________
My party schedule:
2009-02-21 - DJ Attention @ I'm So Popular
2009-06-18 - DJ Annoying @ People Need To Know Where I'll Be
2012-11-32 - DJ Insufferable ɸ Or At Least the Stalkers I Complain About
2048-06-66 - Spastic & Whocares ¶ Although I'm Actually Flattered
9999-45-81 - Tweaker Gimp ☼ I Probably Won't Even Go To This But I Have To Make Sure I Fill Up All The Available Space Here

quote:

Originally posted by infinity HiGH While I kind of respect Michael Moore for his intent to show things to people from a different perspective, he has a tendencey to manipulate and twist facts around to fit his point. I'd by no means take his movies as the ultimate truth or even as a great source of information.

Well, I think he presents information in a great format... Although in his Fahrenheit 9/11 he manipulated some opinions and NOT so much FACTS to fit his view points...

I would say 100 % of the information he presents in Sicko is correct.

CNN's Dr. Sanjay Gupta contented that Moore was playing loosey with some of his facts, and well Dr Gupta got BURNED big time.

Dr. Gupta apologised

http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTVNews/20070719/moore_fued_cnn070719/20070719?hub=Entertainment

The video:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EjvlGRfozss

Last edited by ravr on Jul-22-2007 at 20:58