Article

2005-06-27 Terror Networks & Islam

Archived material is restricted to Rantburg regulars and members. If you need access email fred.pruitt=at=gmail.com with your nick to be added to the members list. There is no charge to join Rantburg as a member.

Posted by anonymous5089 2005-06-27 07:50|| || Front Page|| [3 views since 2007-05-07] Top

#1 Far too long and the writer needs to learn something about the facts of history. The Irish were neutral throughout the war and the Scots, Welsh, English, Canadians and Australians were all part of single entity, namely the British Empire, i.e. they were not independant states.

Posted by phil_b 2005-06-27 08:44|| 2005-06-27 08:44|| Front Page Top

#2 Not to mention that Napoleon abdicated in 1815 so Europe didn't spend half a century fighting Napoleon, not to mention the fact that the Red Army lost some 5 million soldiers in 1941 alone (alongside with 5 million prisonners, vodka-drinking surrenderring monkeys anyone?), not to mention the many, many other factual errors.

When you want to draw conclusions you firt get your facts straight.

Phil_b

Even if they were closer to Great Britain than mere allies the fact is that the Commonweallth countries were independent states, even if the King was supposedly their common head of state: It was a very, very close vote who brought South Africa in the war and it was teh Australian governemnt, not Churchill, who had the final say on the use of Ausdtralian troops: the Australian government recalled the Australian troops from Middle East and when Churchill tried to have them deployed at Singapore (thinking the Japanese could not leave Singapore behind) he was overruled by the Australian governement.

You are right for Ireland (neutral) and Scotland (part of the United Kingdom)

Posted by JFM">JFM 2005-06-27 09:35|| 2005-06-27 09:35|| Front Page Top

#3 Sixty-three years ago, Nazi Germany had overrun almost all of Europe

Well, at least, he puts Islam into a proper perspective.

Posted by gromgorru 2005-06-27 09:39|| 2005-06-27 09:39|| Front Page Top

#4 Liberals protest in nice safe places because they are cowards who are unwilling to help those in need to fight for peace. It wouldn't bother so much if they didn't get in the way and just make themselves feel important by sniping at those who actually do something.

I'm against hunger. Sadly, I don't help at the soup kitchens, but if I say I'm AGAINST HUNGER, then that's good enough, right? I guess I'm an even better person when I complain that others, who try to do something, aren't doing it right.

Posted by 2b 2005-06-27 10:32|| 2005-06-27 10:32|| Front Page Top

#5 The problem with Libralism today is not that they are stupid or that they are not believing in thier values. The problem is the Democratic party has been overwhelmed with LLL's radicals that for the most part want to see america and our current system fail and fall apart so they can institute their ideas into order. They are a loose group of Socialist (polar opposite capitollist) Enviromentalist (anti-coorporation especially US capalism) Athiest (anti-religion hense in-god-we-trust on the money just dont work) Self Hating rich kids (usually colledge kids well to do sheltered full of guilt or propoganda or both)

These people are not the majority but a small minority who with the help of a supporting media have done much to further their goal. Hopefully things can be turned hopefully????

Posted by C-Low 2005-06-27 15:56|| 2005-06-27 15:56|| Front Page Top

#6 I guess you mean something else when you say liberals. "Liberals" in my book means dumbing down for the lowest common denominator. Liberal means pussy. They are pussies when it comes to improving education, they are pussies in dealing with tyrants, they are pussies in dealing with crime, pussies in dealing with drugs. Just about any difficult social problem you can deal with their solution has always been to throw money at it and lower the standard. oooooh...but somebody might get hurt..somebodies self-esteem might be damaged.

I always thought a good and true bumper sticker for "liberals" as they have defined themselves would be, "lower standards and proud of it".

Name one thing in the 20th Century that you can look to liberals for making anything better? Women's rights? Bah, the birth control pill did 99% of the heavy lifting. I'm personally at a loss for any other great achievement to credit them for.

Posted by 2b 2005-06-27 17:41|| 2005-06-27 17:41|| Front Page Top

#7 SCOTUS gave itself judicial review - screw legislators - powers in Marbury v Madison (1804). Everyone knows what Madison did for a living. And Marbury? He was a judge, just like the members of SCOTUS, who claimed tenure even though no law gave that to judges. So much for impartiality and objectivity.

Posted by Free Thinker 2005-06-27 17:47|| 2005-06-27 17:47|| Front Page Top

#8 And don't forget the Federal Reserve Act! It's all there in Red White and Blue print! Hummmmmmmmmmmmmmmm

What's that sound?

Bzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz!
What is it?

Help!

Jump right up on the stage! We've got an idiots delight talent show for you tonight!

Posted by Shipman 2005-06-27 17:51|| 2005-06-27 17:51|| Front Page Top

23:52 Frank G
23:43 Frank G
23:39 Frank G
23:34 Mike Kozlowski
22:57 Rafael
22:52 Phil Fraering
22:41 Frank G
22:34 jules 2
22:23 trailing wife
22:21 JosephMendiola
22:14 eLarson
22:12 trailing wife
22:12 Frank G
22:11 trailing wife
21:47 Mr. hen pecked
21:43 trailing wife
21:37 trailing wife
21:36 Prince Esa
21:32 Red Dog
21:27 JosephMendiola
21:23 Mike Kozlowski
21:19 Red Dog
21:19 Mike Kozlowski
21:18 trailing wife