Obama's Son harasses Vietnam Vet, gets his ass beat.

[saintmichaeldefendthem]

You are a racist and apparently you think you're a mind reader too.

My other thread about the white boy shot by police should indicate to any objective observer (meaning not you) that I hate all thugs no matter what their race. An objective observer would also conclude definitively that if I'm calling thugs thugs no matter what their race is, then I'm certainly not calling anyone a thug because they're black. But because you're a racist, you see everything through race colored lenses and therefore are incapable of critical thinking skills or objective analysis.

You're a racist. Own it. Get some help for it.

Repeatedly calling me a "racist" is just making you look more like a clown.

If you don't understand how automatically assuming that the black guy in the video is the "thug" and the white guy is the hero is racist, I don't know what to tell you.

Those are your ASSumptions, not mine. You are not a mind reader, you just make unsubstantiated guesses guided by your racial bigotry.

Oh, BTW, since I'm actually Native American, I don't have a dog in the fight either way. I'm sure a racist like you ASSumed I was white.

Your OP makes your "assumptions" about the video pretty damn clear. I have no need to read your mind.

If you think I'm wrong, you're welcome to repudiate your own OP, and I'll accept it and apologize.

Something tells me that's not going to happen, though.

Yes, please apologize.

17 yo boy shot by police because he wasn't resisting arrest. | US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum

I'm going to give you a hint. The boy was white, with blond hair, one of the best specimens of your race. Real racists on this forum like Odium and Tank would never make a thread like this because they only make threads about black thugs. In fact, they weighed in on this thread and instinctively cursed the cop because the suspect was white, which we all know would not happen if the suspect were black.

I do say outrageous things just to piss off Leftists...like "feral chimp", but when it comes to my views on human behavior, they apply to everyone regardless of race. On other threads, I've voiced my beef with white people, but it has more to do with Manifest Destiny by which evil, lunatic Protestant white people used the Bible to justify what was done to my people historically. In the modern day, however, white people generally do behave much better than blacks, as is the case with anyone who doesn't think they're a perpetual victim. And even that observation does not make me a racist.

So yes, please do the honorable thing and apologize. I wait diligently for it.

Your other thread has absolutely no relevance on this thread, nor does the fact that you called a white kid a "thug" in another thread have any relevance as to whether or not your "assumptions" in this thread are racist or not.

Yes it does. And you truly are a racist bigot without a shred of objectivity. I endeavor to teach my kids to be nothing like you and your ilk.

 

[theDoctorisIn]

Repeatedly calling me a "racist" is just making you look more like a clown.

If you don't understand how automatically assuming that the black guy in the video is the "thug" and the white guy is the hero is racist, I don't know what to tell you.

Those are your ASSumptions, not mine. You are not a mind reader, you just make unsubstantiated guesses guided by your racial bigotry.

Oh, BTW, since I'm actually Native American, I don't have a dog in the fight either way. I'm sure a racist like you ASSumed I was white.

Your OP makes your "assumptions" about the video pretty damn clear. I have no need to read your mind.

If you think I'm wrong, you're welcome to repudiate your own OP, and I'll accept it and apologize.

Something tells me that's not going to happen, though.

Yes, please apologize.

17 yo boy shot by police because he wasn't resisting arrest. | US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum

I'm going to give you a hint. The boy was white, with blond hair, one of the best specimens of your race. Real racists on this forum like Odium and Tank would never make a thread like this because they only make threads about black thugs. In fact, they weighed in on this thread and instinctively cursed the cop because the suspect was white, which we all know would not happen if the suspect were black.

I do say outrageous things just to piss off Leftists...like "feral chimp", but when it comes to my views on human behavior, they apply to everyone regardless of race. On other threads, I've voiced my beef with white people, but it has more to do with Manifest Destiny by which evil, lunatic Protestant white people used the Bible to justify what was done to my people historically. In the modern day, however, white people generally do behave much better than blacks, as is the case with anyone who doesn't think they're a perpetual victim. And even that observation does not make me a racist.

So yes, please do the honorable thing and apologize. I wait diligently for it.

Your other thread has absolutely no relevance on this thread, nor does the fact that you called a white kid a "thug" in another thread have any relevance as to whether or not your "assumptions" in this thread are racist or not.

Yes it does. And you truly are a racist bigot without a shred of objectivity. I endeavor to teach my kids to be nothing like you and your ilk.

No, it really doesn't - and shouting "I know you are but what am I" doesn't sound any smarter now than it did when you were in elementary school.

 

[saintmichaeldefendthem]

Those are your ASSumptions, not mine. You are not a mind reader, you just make unsubstantiated guesses guided by your racial bigotry.

Oh, BTW, since I'm actually Native American, I don't have a dog in the fight either way. I'm sure a racist like you ASSumed I was white.

Your OP makes your "assumptions" about the video pretty damn clear. I have no need to read your mind.

If you think I'm wrong, you're welcome to repudiate your own OP, and I'll accept it and apologize.

Something tells me that's not going to happen, though.

Yes, please apologize.

17 yo boy shot by police because he wasn't resisting arrest. | US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum

I'm going to give you a hint. The boy was white, with blond hair, one of the best specimens of your race. Real racists on this forum like Odium and Tank would never make a thread like this because they only make threads about black thugs. In fact, they weighed in on this thread and instinctively cursed the cop because the suspect was white, which we all know would not happen if the suspect were black.

I do say outrageous things just to piss off Leftists...like "feral chimp", but when it comes to my views on human behavior, they apply to everyone regardless of race. On other threads, I've voiced my beef with white people, but it has more to do with Manifest Destiny by which evil, lunatic Protestant white people used the Bible to justify what was done to my people historically. In the modern day, however, white people generally do behave much better than blacks, as is the case with anyone who doesn't think they're a perpetual victim. And even that observation does not make me a racist.

So yes, please do the honorable thing and apologize. I wait diligently for it.

Your other thread has absolutely no relevance on this thread, nor does the fact that you called a white kid a "thug" in another thread have any relevance as to whether or not your "assumptions" in this thread are racist or not.

Yes it does. And you truly are a racist bigot without a shred of objectivity. I endeavor to teach my kids to be nothing like you and your ilk.

No, it really doesn't - and shouting "I know you are but what am I" doesn't sound any smarter now than it did when you were in elementary school.

You're not even smart enough to know it's not up to your personal opinion. Yes the other thread proves beyond a doubt to any reasonable people that I apply an even standard without racial bias. You're a batshit lunatic racist bigot, not a reasonable person.

Since I have zero respect for you and extremely low expectations, I'm waiting for you to put the mod hat on now.

 

[Zander]

Why would that little black dude try to attack that huge white guy? He was giving up 12" in height and probably 100 lbs in weight.....He's lucky he didn't really get hurt.

 

[theDoctorisIn]

Your OP makes your "assumptions" about the video pretty damn clear. I have no need to read your mind.

If you think I'm wrong, you're welcome to repudiate your own OP, and I'll accept it and apologize.

Something tells me that's not going to happen, though.

Yes, please apologize.

17 yo boy shot by police because he wasn't resisting arrest. | US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum

I'm going to give you a hint. The boy was white, with blond hair, one of the best specimens of your race. Real racists on this forum like Odium and Tank would never make a thread like this because they only make threads about black thugs. In fact, they weighed in on this thread and instinctively cursed the cop because the suspect was white, which we all know would not happen if the suspect were black.

I do say outrageous things just to piss off Leftists...like "feral chimp", but when it comes to my views on human behavior, they apply to everyone regardless of race. On other threads, I've voiced my beef with white people, but it has more to do with Manifest Destiny by which evil, lunatic Protestant white people used the Bible to justify what was done to my people historically. In the modern day, however, white people generally do behave much better than blacks, as is the case with anyone who doesn't think they're a perpetual victim. And even that observation does not make me a racist.

So yes, please do the honorable thing and apologize. I wait diligently for it.

Your other thread has absolutely no relevance on this thread, nor does the fact that you called a white kid a "thug" in another thread have any relevance as to whether or not your "assumptions" in this thread are racist or not.

Yes it does. And you truly are a racist bigot without a shred of objectivity. I endeavor to teach my kids to be nothing like you and your ilk.

No, it really doesn't - and shouting "I know you are but what am I" doesn't sound any smarter now than it did when you were in elementary school.

You're not even smart enough to know it's not up to your personal opinion. Yes the other thread proves beyond a doubt to any reasonable people that I apply an even standard without racial bias. You're a batshit lunatic racist bigot, not a reasonable person.

Since I have zero respect for you and extremely low expectations, I'm waiting for you to put the mod hat on now.

Me calling you a racist seems to be causing you to a have a real meltdown. I'd take a deep look at that, if I were you.

 

[saintmichaeldefendthem]

Yes, please apologize.

17 yo boy shot by police because he wasn't resisting arrest. | US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum

I'm going to give you a hint. The boy was white, with blond hair, one of the best specimens of your race. Real racists on this forum like Odium and Tank would never make a thread like this because they only make threads about black thugs. In fact, they weighed in on this thread and instinctively cursed the cop because the suspect was white, which we all know would not happen if the suspect were black.

I do say outrageous things just to piss off Leftists...like "feral chimp", but when it comes to my views on human behavior, they apply to everyone regardless of race. On other threads, I've voiced my beef with white people, but it has more to do with Manifest Destiny by which evil, lunatic Protestant white people used the Bible to justify what was done to my people historically. In the modern day, however, white people generally do behave much better than blacks, as is the case with anyone who doesn't think they're a perpetual victim. And even that observation does not make me a racist.

So yes, please do the honorable thing and apologize. I wait diligently for it.

Your other thread has absolutely no relevance on this thread, nor does the fact that you called a white kid a "thug" in another thread have any relevance as to whether or not your "assumptions" in this thread are racist or not.

Yes it does. And you truly are a racist bigot without a shred of objectivity. I endeavor to teach my kids to be nothing like you and your ilk.

No, it really doesn't - and shouting "I know you are but what am I" doesn't sound any smarter now than it did when you were in elementary school.

You're not even smart enough to know it's not up to your personal opinion. Yes the other thread proves beyond a doubt to any reasonable people that I apply an even standard without racial bias. You're a batshit lunatic racist bigot, not a reasonable person.

Since I have zero respect for you and extremely low expectations, I'm waiting for you to put the mod hat on now.

Me calling you a racist seems to be causing you to a have a real meltdown. I'd take a deep look at that, if I were you.

 

[Camp]

I said he gave birth to modern day terrorism. I base this on a book written by a military and terrorism expert who served in that capacity as a Marine Commander and after retirement as a private consultant at the Pentagon.

Read the long version of the review or get the book.

amazon.com/PeaceKeepers-War-Beirut-Marine-Commander/dp/1597974250

I'm sure Jimmy Carter will be interested to learn he never had to deal with modern day terrorism.

The question and challenge is not whether Carter had to deal with it, the question is how he dealt with it and how Reagan dealt with it. The contention and thesis put forward in the book I linked by Col. Geraghty, USMC (Ret.) is that the difference in how the issue was handled by Reagan changed terrorism in that it became an acceptable and viable tactic against the US because of Reagan's responses. Carter had refused to negotiate with terrorist, including Iran. Reagan not only negotiated, be did business and paid for hostages and gave weak responses when he gave them. He invited further terrorist attacks.

Bullshit! You said that Reagan "gave birth to modern terrorism". That means by precise elimination, Jimmy Carter could not have been dealing with modern terrorism. I'm sure he'd be interested to know that.

When were Americans specifically targeted by middle eastern terrorist? Please list those attacks made during the Carter administration.

Ok, but after I provide the list, please do me the courtesy of admitting you are a complete ass.

Or at least that you were wrong.

Oh hell, you don't have the honor to do neither, you're a Leftist.

03/09/1977 Group of Hanafi Muslims seizes three buildings in Washington, D.C; siege ends two days later with 149 hostages released, journalist and police officer killed

11/04/1979 US Embassy in Tehran seized, 66 taken hostage

01/20/1981 Remaining 52 US Embassy hostages seized in November 1979 released

Historic Timeline | National Counterterrorism Center

And since you're not going to admit it yourself, I'll say for the record you are a complete ass and you were wrong.

You are the one being an ass. The Hanafi Muslim were not middle eastern and had nothing to do with the middle east. They were American Muslims of what were known as the Nation of Islam or Black Muslims. The hostage takers were American citizens and their cause was totally American. They were demanding action in regards to Americans of their faith being murdered. They wanted the murderers turned over to them. None of their negotiation demands were met. They were talked into surrender by Ambassadors from Muslim countries, Including the Iranian Ambassador quoting the Koran.

The US Embassy seizure was conducted by a newly controlled nation, Iran, not by a terrorist group or organization. Standard policy of refusing to negotiate was used. Carter stuck to the policy of refusing to make exchanges and deals. The birth of modern day terrorism was born when Reagan came into office and deviated from the no negotiation policy. He ushered in an era of targeting Americans for kidnapping and murder.

Now go back to work and find us an example of a middle eastern group of terrorist targeting and attacking Americans before the Reagan era. I'll be happy to provide a seemingly endless stream of them after Reagan came into office.

 

[saintmichaeldefendthem]

I'm sure Jimmy Carter will be interested to learn he never had to deal with modern day terrorism.

The question and challenge is not whether Carter had to deal with it, the question is how he dealt with it and how Reagan dealt with it. The contention and thesis put forward in the book I linked by Col. Geraghty, USMC (Ret.) is that the difference in how the issue was handled by Reagan changed terrorism in that it became an acceptable and viable tactic against the US because of Reagan's responses. Carter had refused to negotiate with terrorist, including Iran. Reagan not only negotiated, be did business and paid for hostages and gave weak responses when he gave them. He invited further terrorist attacks.

Bullshit! You said that Reagan "gave birth to modern terrorism". That means by precise elimination, Jimmy Carter could not have been dealing with modern terrorism. I'm sure he'd be interested to know that.

When were Americans specifically targeted by middle eastern terrorist? Please list those attacks made during the Carter administration.

Ok, but after I provide the list, please do me the courtesy of admitting you are a complete ass.

Or at least that you were wrong.

Oh hell, you don't have the honor to do neither, you're a Leftist.

03/09/1977 Group of Hanafi Muslims seizes three buildings in Washington, D.C; siege ends two days later with 149 hostages released, journalist and police officer killed

11/04/1979 US Embassy in Tehran seized, 66 taken hostage

01/20/1981 Remaining 52 US Embassy hostages seized in November 1979 released

Historic Timeline | National Counterterrorism Center

And since you're not going to admit it yourself, I'll say for the record you are a complete ass and you were wrong.

You are the one being an ass. The Hanafi Muslim were not middle eastern and had nothing to do with the middle east. They were American Muslims of what were known as the Nation of Islam or Black Muslims. The hostage takers were American citizens and their cause was totally American. They were demanding action in regards to Americans of their faith being murdered. They wanted the murderers turned over to them. None of their negotiation demands were met. They were talked into surrender by Ambassadors for Muslim countries, Including the Iranian Ambassador quoting the Koran.

The US Embassy seizure was conducted by a newly controlled nation, Iran, not by a terrorist group or organization. Standard policy of refusing to negotiate was used. Carter stuck to the policy of refusing to make exchanges and deals. The birth of modern day terrorism was born when Reagan came into office and deviated from the no negotiation policy. He ushered in an era of targeting Americans for kidnapping and murder.

Now go back to work and find us an example of a middle eastern group of terrorist targeting and attacking Americans before the Reagan era. I'll be happy to provide a seemingly endless stream of them after Reagan came into office.

I knew you would stay full retard even when irrefutable proof of your buffoonery is offered.

 

[theDoctorisIn]

Your other thread has absolutely no relevance on this thread, nor does the fact that you called a white kid a "thug" in another thread have any relevance as to whether or not your "assumptions" in this thread are racist or not.

Yes it does. And you truly are a racist bigot without a shred of objectivity. I endeavor to teach my kids to be nothing like you and your ilk.

No, it really doesn't - and shouting "I know you are but what am I" doesn't sound any smarter now than it did when you were in elementary school.

You're not even smart enough to know it's not up to your personal opinion. Yes the other thread proves beyond a doubt to any reasonable people that I apply an even standard without racial bias. You're a batshit lunatic racist bigot, not a reasonable person.

Since I have zero respect for you and extremely low expectations, I'm waiting for you to put the mod hat on now.

Me calling you a racist seems to be causing you to a have a real meltdown. I'd take a deep look at that, if I were you.

Flouncing out in a huff is kinda making my point for me, but whatever. Buh-bye.

 

[jillian]

you call yourself a Christian?

Yes. Do you care to discuss the OP? Because I'm not up for discussion. If you like, I can have a moderator remind you of this.

No, you can't "have" us do anything, clown.

As for the OP - you know that the "Vietnam vet" in that video never served in Vietnam, has a criminal record, and has a history of mental illness - whereas the "ghetto thug" had no criminal history, and later apologized for his part in the altercation - right?

Yes, we covered that. The Vietnam Vet thing was a mistake, but in my defense, this isn't a 5 year old story to me and that's how I saw it reported.

Do you believe everything you read on the internet automatically, or only when it fits into your racist worldview?

I can't speak for her, but when I hear the term 'racist' on the internet it only convinces me of the racism of those who use it.

yes. i think you should defend the bigot O/P. :thus:

 

[jillian]

The question and challenge is not whether Carter had to deal with it, the question is how he dealt with it and how Reagan dealt with it. The contention and thesis put forward in the book I linked by Col. Geraghty, USMC (Ret.) is that the difference in how the issue was handled by Reagan changed terrorism in that it became an acceptable and viable tactic against the US because of Reagan's responses. Carter had refused to negotiate with terrorist, including Iran. Reagan not only negotiated, be did business and paid for hostages and gave weak responses when he gave them. He invited further terrorist attacks.

Bullshit! You said that Reagan "gave birth to modern terrorism". That means by precise elimination, Jimmy Carter could not have been dealing with modern terrorism. I'm sure he'd be interested to know that.

When were Americans specifically targeted by middle eastern terrorist? Please list those attacks made during the Carter administration.

Ok, but after I provide the list, please do me the courtesy of admitting you are a complete ass.

Or at least that you were wrong.

Oh hell, you don't have the honor to do neither, you're a Leftist.

03/09/1977 Group of Hanafi Muslims seizes three buildings in Washington, D.C; siege ends two days later with 149 hostages released, journalist and police officer killed

11/04/1979 US Embassy in Tehran seized, 66 taken hostage

01/20/1981 Remaining 52 US Embassy hostages seized in November 1979 released

Historic Timeline | National Counterterrorism Center

And since you're not going to admit it yourself, I'll say for the record you are a complete ass and you were wrong.

You are the one being an ass. The Hanafi Muslim were not middle eastern and had nothing to do with the middle east. They were American Muslims of what were known as the Nation of Islam or Black Muslims. The hostage takers were American citizens and their cause was totally American. They were demanding action in regards to Americans of their faith being murdered. They wanted the murderers turned over to them. None of their negotiation demands were met. They were talked into surrender by Ambassadors for Muslim countries, Including the Iranian Ambassador quoting the Koran.

The US Embassy seizure was conducted by a newly controlled nation, Iran, not by a terrorist group or organization. Standard policy of refusing to negotiate was used. Carter stuck to the policy of refusing to make exchanges and deals. The birth of modern day terrorism was born when Reagan came into office and deviated from the no negotiation policy. He ushered in an era of targeting Americans for kidnapping and murder.

Now go back to work and find us an example of a middle eastern group of terrorist targeting and attacking Americans before the Reagan era. I'll be happy to provide a seemingly endless stream of them after Reagan came into office.

I knew you would stay full retard even when irrefutable proof of your buffoonery is offered.

what a maroon.

 

[Camp]

The question and challenge is not whether Carter had to deal with it, the question is how he dealt with it and how Reagan dealt with it. The contention and thesis put forward in the book I linked by Col. Geraghty, USMC (Ret.) is that the difference in how the issue was handled by Reagan changed terrorism in that it became an acceptable and viable tactic against the US because of Reagan's responses. Carter had refused to negotiate with terrorist, including Iran. Reagan not only negotiated, be did business and paid for hostages and gave weak responses when he gave them. He invited further terrorist attacks.

Bullshit! You said that Reagan "gave birth to modern terrorism". That means by precise elimination, Jimmy Carter could not have been dealing with modern terrorism. I'm sure he'd be interested to know that.

When were Americans specifically targeted by middle eastern terrorist? Please list those attacks made during the Carter administration.

Ok, but after I provide the list, please do me the courtesy of admitting you are a complete ass.

Or at least that you were wrong.

Oh hell, you don't have the honor to do neither, you're a Leftist.

03/09/1977 Group of Hanafi Muslims seizes three buildings in Washington, D.C; siege ends two days later with 149 hostages released, journalist and police officer killed

11/04/1979 US Embassy in Tehran seized, 66 taken hostage

01/20/1981 Remaining 52 US Embassy hostages seized in November 1979 released

Historic Timeline | National Counterterrorism Center

And since you're not going to admit it yourself, I'll say for the record you are a complete ass and you were wrong.

You are the one being an ass. The Hanafi Muslim were not middle eastern and had nothing to do with the middle east. They were American Muslims of what were known as the Nation of Islam or Black Muslims. The hostage takers were American citizens and their cause was totally American. They were demanding action in regards to Americans of their faith being murdered. They wanted the murderers turned over to them. None of their negotiation demands were met. They were talked into surrender by Ambassadors for Muslim countries, Including the Iranian Ambassador quoting the Koran.

The US Embassy seizure was conducted by a newly controlled nation, Iran, not by a terrorist group or organization. Standard policy of refusing to negotiate was used. Carter stuck to the policy of refusing to make exchanges and deals. The birth of modern day terrorism was born when Reagan came into office and deviated from the no negotiation policy. He ushered in an era of targeting Americans for kidnapping and murder.

Now go back to work and find us an example of a middle eastern group of terrorist targeting and attacking Americans before the Reagan era. I'll be happy to provide a seemingly endless stream of them after Reagan came into office.

I knew you would stay full retard even when irrefutable proof of your buffoonery is offered.

Your irrefutable proof is bullshit. You are trying to use an example of domestic terrorism conducted by Americans as an example of modern era or Reagan era terrorism. You fail. Your example of the Iran hostage crisis proves the point that Carter stayed with the no negotiation policy and Reagan deviated from it. What followed from that deviation was an era of terrorism against Americans that was never seen before.

I never said there was no terrorism before Reagan. I never said there was never Muslim terrorism. I said Reagan gave birth to modern day terrorism and so did one of the top military terrorist experts at the Pentagon. I have a source, you don't. I have facts, you have unsubstantiated speculations and uninformed guessing.

 

[saintmichaeldefendthem]

Bullshit! You said that Reagan "gave birth to modern terrorism". That means by precise elimination, Jimmy Carter could not have been dealing with modern terrorism. I'm sure he'd be interested to know that.

When were Americans specifically targeted by middle eastern terrorist? Please list those attacks made during the Carter administration.

Ok, but after I provide the list, please do me the courtesy of admitting you are a complete ass.

Or at least that you were wrong.

Oh hell, you don't have the honor to do neither, you're a Leftist.

03/09/1977 Group of Hanafi Muslims seizes three buildings in Washington, D.C; siege ends two days later with 149 hostages released, journalist and police officer killed

11/04/1979 US Embassy in Tehran seized, 66 taken hostage

01/20/1981 Remaining 52 US Embassy hostages seized in November 1979 released

Historic Timeline | National Counterterrorism Center

And since you're not going to admit it yourself, I'll say for the record you are a complete ass and you were wrong.

You are the one being an ass. The Hanafi Muslim were not middle eastern and had nothing to do with the middle east. They were American Muslims of what were known as the Nation of Islam or Black Muslims. The hostage takers were American citizens and their cause was totally American. They were demanding action in regards to Americans of their faith being murdered. They wanted the murderers turned over to them. None of their negotiation demands were met. They were talked into surrender by Ambassadors for Muslim countries, Including the Iranian Ambassador quoting the Koran.

The US Embassy seizure was conducted by a newly controlled nation, Iran, not by a terrorist group or organization. Standard policy of refusing to negotiate was used. Carter stuck to the policy of refusing to make exchanges and deals. The birth of modern day terrorism was born when Reagan came into office and deviated from the no negotiation policy. He ushered in an era of targeting Americans for kidnapping and murder.

Now go back to work and find us an example of a middle eastern group of terrorist targeting and attacking Americans before the Reagan era. I'll be happy to provide a seemingly endless stream of them after Reagan came into office.

I knew you would stay full retard even when irrefutable proof of your buffoonery is offered.

what a maroon.

When you're insulting somebody's intelligence, you should at least make an effort to spell right, moron.

Maroon is a color.

 

[Pogo]

When were Americans specifically targeted by middle eastern terrorist? Please list those attacks made during the Carter administration.

Ok, but after I provide the list, please do me the courtesy of admitting you are a complete ass.

Or at least that you were wrong.

Oh hell, you don't have the honor to do neither, you're a Leftist.

03/09/1977 Group of Hanafi Muslims seizes three buildings in Washington, D.C; siege ends two days later with 149 hostages released, journalist and police officer killed

11/04/1979 US Embassy in Tehran seized, 66 taken hostage

01/20/1981 Remaining 52 US Embassy hostages seized in November 1979 released

Historic Timeline | National Counterterrorism Center

And since you're not going to admit it yourself, I'll say for the record you are a complete ass and you were wrong.

You are the one being an ass. The Hanafi Muslim were not middle eastern and had nothing to do with the middle east. They were American Muslims of what were known as the Nation of Islam or Black Muslims. The hostage takers were American citizens and their cause was totally American. They were demanding action in regards to Americans of their faith being murdered. They wanted the murderers turned over to them. None of their negotiation demands were met. They were talked into surrender by Ambassadors for Muslim countries, Including the Iranian Ambassador quoting the Koran.

The US Embassy seizure was conducted by a newly controlled nation, Iran, not by a terrorist group or organization. Standard policy of refusing to negotiate was used. Carter stuck to the policy of refusing to make exchanges and deals. The birth of modern day terrorism was born when Reagan came into office and deviated from the no negotiation policy. He ushered in an era of targeting Americans for kidnapping and murder.

Now go back to work and find us an example of a middle eastern group of terrorist targeting and attacking Americans before the Reagan era. I'll be happy to provide a seemingly endless stream of them after Reagan came into office.

I knew you would stay full retard even when irrefutable proof of your buffoonery is offered.

what a maroon.

When you're insulting somebody's intelligence, you should at least make an effort to spell right, moron.

Maroon is a color.

Oh sleepin' Cheeses. Have you never seen Bugs The Fuck Bunny?

​

 

[saintmichaeldefendthem]

Oh sleepin' Cheeses. Have you never seen Bugs The Fuck Bunny?

You seem a little tense. You should seek some privacy and rock the casbah a little bit to reduce your stress.

 

[Pogo]

Oh sleepin' Cheeses. Have you never seen Bugs The Fuck Bunny?

You seem a little tense. You should seek some privacy and rock the casbah a little bit to reduce your stress.

We used up the tense jokes here. They're in the ... uh, past now.

 

[Harry Dresden]

Diga me Tonto ---- where do you see a "ghetto" in that video?

It happened in Caliphornica, the whole damned state is a ghetto.

you have never been here have you?....

 

[Harry Dresden]

you call yourself a Christian?

Yes. Do you care to discuss the OP? Because I'm not up for discussion. If you like, I can have a moderator remind you of this.

are you going to be like dottie and tell on someone?....

 

[Meathead]

Bullshit! You said that Reagan "gave birth to modern terrorism". That means by precise elimination, Jimmy Carter could not have been dealing with modern terrorism. I'm sure he'd be interested to know that.

When were Americans specifically targeted by middle eastern terrorist? Please list those attacks made during the Carter administration.

Ok, but after I provide the list, please do me the courtesy of admitting you are a complete ass.

Or at least that you were wrong.

Oh hell, you don't have the honor to do neither, you're a Leftist.

03/09/1977 Group of Hanafi Muslims seizes three buildings in Washington, D.C; siege ends two days later with 149 hostages released, journalist and police officer killed

11/04/1979 US Embassy in Tehran seized, 66 taken hostage

01/20/1981 Remaining 52 US Embassy hostages seized in November 1979 released

Historic Timeline | National Counterterrorism Center

And since you're not going to admit it yourself, I'll say for the record you are a complete ass and you were wrong.

You are the one being an ass. The Hanafi Muslim were not middle eastern and had nothing to do with the middle east. They were American Muslims of what were known as the Nation of Islam or Black Muslims. The hostage takers were American citizens and their cause was totally American. They were demanding action in regards to Americans of their faith being murdered. They wanted the murderers turned over to them. None of their negotiation demands were met. They were talked into surrender by Ambassadors for Muslim countries, Including the Iranian Ambassador quoting the Koran.

The US Embassy seizure was conducted by a newly controlled nation, Iran, not by a terrorist group or organization. Standard policy of refusing to negotiate was used. Carter stuck to the policy of refusing to make exchanges and deals. The birth of modern day terrorism was born when Reagan came into office and deviated from the no negotiation policy. He ushered in an era of targeting Americans for kidnapping and murder.

Now go back to work and find us an example of a middle eastern group of terrorist targeting and attacking Americans before the Reagan era. I'll be happy to provide a seemingly endless stream of them after Reagan came into office.

I knew you would stay full retard even when irrefutable proof of your buffoonery is offered.

Your irrefutable proof is bullshit. You are trying to use an example of domestic terrorism conducted by Americans as an example of modern era or Reagan era terrorism. You fail. Your example of the Iran hostage crisis proves the point that Carter stayed with the no negotiation policy and Reagan deviated from it. What followed from that deviation was an era of terrorism against Americans that was never seen before.

I never said there was no terrorism before Reagan. I never said there was never Muslim terrorism. I said Reagan gave birth to modern day terrorism and so did one of the top military terrorist experts at the Pentagon. I have a source, you don't. I have facts, you have unsubstantiated speculations and uninformed guessing.

Save whatever face you have left and admit to being wrong. To those filled with righteous indignation it does not come easy, but facts are facts. To say that Reagan ushered in the period of Islamofacist terrorism is even sillier than saying the Clintons are honest people.

 

[Care4all]

Total jerk off thread.

Most people jerk off to porn. You got issues, dude.

this is your porn..... you just love this kind of shit,


fake catholic, racist scum....hmmm who's son could you be? Ahhhh....Lucifers!