Politics: J'accuse! - Page 65

Sidd Finch · 04-09-2004, 06:08 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Not Me
Was that in the WSJ article? Because that is not what I read in the transcript of the hearings.

I read the transcript and saw news clips. How did you get your information?

According to the transcript in the link THAT YOU POSTED Kerrey said this:

I believe, first of all, that we underestimate that this war on terrorism is really a war against radical Islam. Terrorism is a tactic. It's not a war itself.

You really ought to read links before posting them. Psycho.

Not Me · 04-09-2004, 06:09 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Tyrone_Slothrop
I think he objects to the idea of a war "on terrorism." Makes sense to me.

Meaning what? That he is OK with a war against particular terrorists but not OK with a war on terrorism in general?

Not Me · 04-09-2004, 06:10 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Sidd Finch
According to the transcript in the link THAT YOU POSTED Kerrey said this:

I believe, first of all, that we underestimate that this war on terrorism is really a war against radical Islam. Terrorism is a tactic. It's not a war itself.

You really ought to read links before posting them. Psycho.

Conveniently you leave out the subsequent statements. Psycho.

Sexual Harassment Panda · 04-09-2004, 06:11 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Gattigap
Well, you did misconstrue 'em's posts, but they're not really about that. Actually, the subtext has to do with polygamy.

Polygamy.....hummmuhmmm...polygamy...

Not Me · 04-09-2004, 06:14 PM

. . . at least you didn't have her as your mother:

http://news.findlaw.com/court_tv/s/2...004231226.html

Tyrone Slothrop · 04-09-2004, 06:14 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Not Me
Meaning what? That he is OK with a war against particular terrorists but not OK with a war on terrorism in general?

After we're done with the war on terrorism, can we have a war on cruelty? And deception?

Sidd Finch · 04-09-2004, 06:15 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Not Me
I feel that criticizing the US's war against terrorism on the basis that it is really a war against radical islam is Blame-America-First type of anti-Americanism.

Please provide the quote in which Kerrey did that.

Not Me · 04-09-2004, 06:19 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Tyrone_Slothrop
After we're done with the war on terrorism, can we have a war on cruelty? And deception?

How about a war on drugs?

Sidd Finch · 04-09-2004, 06:20 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Not Me
That isn't as bad as the multiple "Dr. Clarke" references by Kerrey.

Why are you so obsessed by this? You seem to bring it up every time someone challenges your inability to support the absurd statement that Kerrey thinks the US should not oppose radical Islam.

In contrast, Dr. Rice took it in stride (once again, from the link you posted):

KERREY: Dr. Clarke, in the spirit of further declassification ...

RICE: Sir, with all ...

KERREY: The spirit ...

RICE: I don't think I look like Dick Clarke, but ...

(LAUGHTER)

KERREY: Dr. Rice, excuse me.

RICE: Thank you.

Tyrone Slothrop · 04-09-2004, 06:21 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Not Me
How about a war on drugs?

Even that is a little more concrete than terrorism. Besides, there it's a metaphoric war. The war on drugs is all about law enforcement, but we know that the war on terrorism is much more than law enforcement.

Sidd Finch · 04-09-2004, 06:26 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by bilmore
While I will say that, yes, it was a gross overgeneralization that won't stand strict scrutiny, I think it would be worthier if you addressed the meat of what she's saying, as a generalization, and not jump on the "here's an exception" train, especially when your exceptions seem to be posts specifically aimed at forming exceptions to that specific overgeneralization. If AG has to make a post that specifically says "here's one to put an end to the "we don't eat our own" paradigm", there's probably SOMETHING to the paradigm.

My god, you're right. I'll keep that in mind next time I want to tell a judge "well, your honor, the defendant's statement that this fact is undisputed is wrong, as shown by this piece of evidence that disputes it." After all, the existence of a thing is generally proof of its non-existence, right?

Not Me · 04-09-2004, 06:27 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Sidd Finch
Please provide the quote in which Kerrey did that.

"Kerrey prefaced his questioning by telling Rice that he thinks the war on terrorism is really a war on radical Islam and that military action under way in Iraq is "dangerously off-track" and that it would lead to civil war."

http://www.wowt.com/news/headlines/671497.html

It was his comments on the war on terrorism being a war on radical islam followed by his comments about Iraq being "dangerously off-track" that made me think that he had some sort of problem with the US going after radical islam (a religious group whose goal is the destruction of the US).

ETA - He also made comments about the US being a Christian army in a Muslim nation (Iraq) when he was talking about Iraq being dangerously off-track.

Sidd Finch · 04-09-2004, 06:30 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Not Me
Meaning what? That he is OK with a war against particular terrorists but not OK with a war on terrorism in general?

Perhaps that he prefer that we wage war on radical Islam, which is a broader problem than simply terrorism. What occurs in the mosques in Saudi Arabia is not terrorism, it's the radical Islam that feeds terrorism.

In other words, killing Osama isn't enough. It's an excellent beginning, but it attacks the weed and not the roots.

Not Me · 04-09-2004, 06:30 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Tyrone_Slothrop
Even that is a little more concrete than terrorism.

I think that the war on terrorism is really a war on particular terrorists who have attacked the US and US targets. The phrase "the war on terrorism" is just a catchy phrase, much like the war on drugs is a catchy phrase.

Tyrone Slothrop · 04-09-2004, 06:33 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Not Me
"Kerrey prefaced his questioning by telling Rice that he thinks the war on terrorism is really a war on radical Islam and that military action under way in Iraq is "dangerously off-track" and that it would lead to civil war."

http://www.wowt.com/news/headlines/671497.html

It was his comments on the war on terrorism being a war on radical islam followed by his comments about Iraq being "dangerously off-track" that made me think that he had some sort of problem with the US going after radical islam (a religious group whose goal is the destruction of the US).

I think Sidd used the word "quote" to suggest that since you post a link to the transcript, and since you were accusing Kerrey of saying something really dumb, you should quote what Kerrey said. As I recall what I heard -- and I'm not even going to look at the transcript, so if I'm wrong you can actually look at it this time and correct me -- he actually said the thing about the war in Iraq being off-track first, and then made his parenthetical observation about the war on terror/radical Islam.

I'm only 75% sure of that, so maybe the possibility of catching me in error will incent you to actually look at what Kerrey said before you continue to post on this subject.