Reagan & Conservatives -- Revisonist History 101

[LA RAM FAN]

Thank goodness Ronald Reagan is not in charge of the war on terrorism and his policies towards terrorism have been abandoned. He would be selling weapons to some terrorist supporting county so he could make backroom deals with the various terror organizations like he did in the 80's. Yippie for the new Obama Doctrine of chasing the fuckers down and killing or capturing them. Yippie for Navy SEALS and robots in the sky.

Happy now?

Obama's still using the Bush doctrine...Reagan defeated the Soviet Empire and kept the muslim nutjobs fighting themselves

You are just making things up. Bush threw out any semblance of a doctrine when he invaded Iraq. He even threw out the Powell Doctrine when he invaded Irag. Terrorist groups flourished under both Bush and Reagan. They grew in size and ability to attack western nations and their allies in Africa and Asia.
Reagan getting all the credit for defeating the Soviet Union is hotly debated in the countries that were freed by the collapse of the USSR. They give credit to the massisve demonstations they conducted, the influence of the Pope and Catholic Church, the nationwide strikes and the threat that the USSR would have to remilitarize Eastern Europe with occupations forces rather than the purely defensive/offenseive forces based in those countries.
The claim that Reagan had the "muslim nutjobs" fighting each other is erroneous at best. The war between Irag and Iran and the way Reagan interfered left scars and problems that would leed to many of the difficulties we face today.

thanks to thatA-hole evil bastard,we have the mess in nicuragua now that started back then and has remained there ever since.

 

[Camp]

Obama's still using the Bush doctrine...Reagan defeated the Soviet Empire and kept the muslim nutjobs fighting themselves

You are just making things up. Bush threw out any semblance of a doctrine when he invaded Iraq. He even threw out the Powell Doctrine when he invaded Irag. Terrorist groups flourished under both Bush and Reagan. They grew in size and ability to attack western nations and their allies in Africa and Asia.
Reagan getting all the credit for defeating the Soviet Union is hotly debated in the countries that were freed by the collapse of the USSR. They give credit to the massisve demonstations they conducted, the influence of the Pope and Catholic Church, the nationwide strikes and the threat that the USSR would have to remilitarize Eastern Europe with occupations forces rather than the purely defensive/offenseive forces based in those countries.
The claim that Reagan had the "muslim nutjobs" fighting each other is erroneous at best. The war between Irag and Iran and the way Reagan interfered left scars and problems that would leed to many of the difficulties we face today.

as i said before camp,dont waste you time with this zionist shill.He is just seeking attention.

Him and all these reaganuts wont even answer ONE SIMPLE QUESTION I HAVE ASKED OVER A HUNDRED TIMES ON THIS THREAD. and just comes back with insults when you challenge him to read a book that refutes his lies.

you've heard the old saying before.




its advise i plan on following for now on.

Don't be concerned with the trolls or insults or the nonsense, I'm not. This thread gets a large amount of views lately. The comment vs. view indicates alot of people reading the post and not making comments. Rather than ignore the trolls, one can troll them back. It's ok because it gives oppurtunity to answer some of the more outragious or stupid stuff that gets posted. It also gives oppurtunity to make points that may be buried many pages back. You may make a post, but if a few days go by those points may not get made to new viewers The shills make things entertaining and they allow one to hammer points home time and again. They are useful. If one is confident in ones position the bs doesn't matter. People see through it and can determine on their own what makes sense and what doesn't.

 

[LA RAM FAN]

9/11's view that John F. Kennedy was a liberal "saint" is rather amusing. Kennedy did a LOT of saber rattling during his short stint as President. Bay of Pigs...Berlin airlift..."advisers" to Vietnam...a naval embargo of Cuba? The "man" was nothing like the "myth" that liberals have constructed since his death.

your worshipping of that evil bastard reagan and evading facts how evil and corrupt he was refusing to address them is whats amusing.

your such a troll you ignore FACTS that the CIA lied to him from the very beginning and all they way through the whole bay of pigs invasion when it was going on that because of their lies,afterwards,he dired dulles and bissel for their blatant lies to him knowing it was going to be a disaster. if you had a brain,you would know the plan they presented to kenendy on the bay of pigs was VASTLY different than the one they presented to eisenhower and the reason they altered when they presented it to kennedy was cause it was designed to suceed under their buddy Nixon whom ran covert wars for the CIA as vp under eisenhower.why do you think nixon in his white house tapes kept referring to that hunt scab in the bay of pigs invasion when that had nothing to do with watergate?

it was because he really meant the kenendy assassination thing since hunt was involved in the bay of pigs invasion.oh and hunt after lying for years about being in dallas,even CONFESSED later on in a tape recoreder to his son on his deathbed he in fact WAS in dealy plaza as an operation to kill kennedy.i posted the video before,but liek the trolls you all are,you ignored it.

oh and even a couple of nixons white house aides wrote a book saying thats what nixon was referring to was the kenendy assassination.guess they are tin foil hatters though?

allen dulles who kenendy fired after the bay of pigs invasion was appoinented on the warren commission by Lyndon johnson who got to handpick them all.no bias of an investigation there. johnson wasnt even investigated and should have been a prime suspect since he had more to gain by the assassiantion that anybody.

oh and you cripple your arguments with your OWN words and help me win my case against you trolls everytime with your own words.

the fact kennedy only sent in ADVISORS and NEVER combat troops.even PBS has acknowledged that fact. johnson reversed kennedys policy on the gulf of tonkin incident.

oh and remember where i said even the commander of that ship and mcnamara have come forward and confessed that johnson lied,that the vietcong never fired on them? playing dodgeball as always.

only an idiot would deny that when Dulles got the phone call from Johnson to be on the warren commission,that he wasnt out celebrating that night knowing he got the last laugh on kennedy able to rewrite history like he did.

no biased investigation by the warren commssion there with THAT appointment.


OH and I ALSO noticed how you EVADED the facts in this link here in post #323 on this page below with overwhelming proof that the CIA has plants in the media.you might want to watch that video in this link here on page

http://www.usmessageboard.com/histo...onservatives-revisonist-history-101-a-22.html
where congress talks about it in that video on that link and not ignore what some very prominent people in government have said about them as well in that link.

not only does THIS post but so many posts i have posted throughout this thread only to watch the facts go ignored prove that the CIA killed kenendy cause he was going to pull out vietnam and knew they could trust johnson to give them the war they wanted,but the other thing that proves beyond a doubt he was going to pull out of vietnam is not only that newspaper the stars and stripes saying so in their headlines,and not only the document he signed 2 months before his assassination"you trolls cant face facts documents dont lie." and cant face facts johnsons document two days later reversed his policy.

but besides the other posts i have made throughout this whole entire thread that clearly showed he was going to pull out completely by 1965,besides those,and as i said a hundred times before his two closest aides saying he told them he had to wait till after the election when he was reelected to pull out completely by the end of 1965,but again his ACTIONS he took prove it as well in the FACT-"which troll oldstyle will ignore", is two days before his assassination,he made good on his promise and his advise senator mansfield and Mcnamara gave him,issuing a directive that called for the first 1,000 of the 12,000 stationed at the time,to come home by the end of christmas 1963.

trolls like oldstyle and zionist paid shill jroc cant face FACTS that as a politician,he had to have Bobby say things to the american people that he was never going to pull out of vietnam to make it look like he was strong against communism and committed to the war but behind the scenes,he was making due on his word to his two closest aides that he was going to pull out completely by 1965 by GRADUALLY pulling out little by little with his first directive of a thousand troop deploya by the end of 1963.

troll Oldstyle doesnt understand that as a policiticn,he couldnt just pull them out completely at one time and expect to be relected by the american people. that he had to do it gradually a few thousand at a time.

the reganut trolls here are left to y whine and cry and defeat and sling shit in defeat like the monkey trolls they are.

Its clearly impossible to have any kind of rational discussion with the reganut trolls here so i wont do thei anymore with them.



advise i plan to follow for now on.thank god for the ignore list.

 

[LA RAM FAN]

You are just making things up. Bush threw out any semblance of a doctrine when he invaded Iraq. He even threw out the Powell Doctrine when he invaded Irag. Terrorist groups flourished under both Bush and Reagan. They grew in size and ability to attack western nations and their allies in Africa and Asia.
Reagan getting all the credit for defeating the Soviet Union is hotly debated in the countries that were freed by the collapse of the USSR. They give credit to the massisve demonstations they conducted, the influence of the Pope and Catholic Church, the nationwide strikes and the threat that the USSR would have to remilitarize Eastern Europe with occupations forces rather than the purely defensive/offenseive forces based in those countries.
The claim that Reagan had the "muslim nutjobs" fighting each other is erroneous at best. The war between Irag and Iran and the way Reagan interfered left scars and problems that would leed to many of the difficulties we face today.

as i said before camp,dont waste you time with this zionist shill.He is just seeking attention.

Him and all these reaganuts wont even answer ONE SIMPLE QUESTION I HAVE ASKED OVER A HUNDRED TIMES ON THIS THREAD. and just comes back with insults when you challenge him to read a book that refutes his lies.

you've heard the old saying before.




its advise i plan on following for now on.

Don't be concerned with the trolls or insults or the nonsense, I'm not. This thread gets a large amount of views lately. The comment vs. view indicates alot of people reading the post and not making comments. Rather than ignore the trolls, one can troll them back. It's ok because it gives oppurtunity to answer some of the more outragious or stupid stuff that gets posted. It also gives oppurtunity to make points that may be buried many pages back. You may make a post, but if a few days go by those points may not get made to new viewers The shills make things entertaining and they allow one to hammer points home time and again. They are useful. If one is confident in ones position the bs doesn't matter. People see through it and can determine on their own what makes sense and what doesn't.

True,It is amusing watching them run off with their tail between their legs not addressing the majority of the posts you make. the rational objective open minded posters coming on here who are curious,unlike them,will take the time to read that book that dante referrenced in his beginning post and will see that the myth of reagan has been exposed once they read it.

they will see that the trolls ignore the majority of your posts when you prove them wrong you post and wont adress them and will see they wont even answer one simple question i have asked over a hundred times.

well I myself have gotten tired of repeating the same thing over and over again just to see it get ignored and not addressed so i m not going to bother with them anymore.If you can tolerate their stupidity,then all means hang around.

Like I said,im done with them,its gets tiresome having to repeat the same thing over and over and over again just ot watch them ignore it act like i never mentioned it.

 

[Jroc]

propaganda results. as always,thanks for displaying your a hypocrite. I love how you reaganuts worship the NET as the truth. thanks for displaying your hypocrisy.

only problem with your lies zionest agent,is the book that dante referred you trolls to at the very beginning of this thread sets the record straight and counters your lies you came up with on the net with ACTUAL SOURCES THE AUTHOR USES FROM THE MAINSTREAM MEDIA BACK THEN. actual mainstream media reports published from back then in the 80's in his footnotes which prove that all that you just posted is pure bullshit and lies. you lose.

you reaganut trolls of course wont read that book and look at the evidence from back then published because your too arrogant to admit you have been proven wrong.

sorry but actual sources printed back in the 80's talking about the recession and how reagan shipped jobs overseas counters your lies posted on the NET you worship.


you lose loser.

Refute the numbers loon, or go back to your Kenedy conspriacy thoeries in the alternet universe that you live in in your basement

for the hundreth time agent troll,dante as well as i have over a hundred times on this thread,referred you to the book in his opening post WITH ACTUAL SOURCES from the 80's proving there was a HUGE recession back then and actual sources that prove everything i have been saying as well.

Its not MY fault your too much of a chickenshit coward to read the book. oh and i have posted several links-"which again is something that I am against, which is why i refer people to books" that shoot down your ramblings too many times to remember,not my fault your too much of a chickenshit coward to read my links.

as always,here you are trolling,you idiot trolls came on and laughed at me when i explained that the mainstream media is controlled by the CIA and when i gave a link with actual HIGH RANKING PEOPLE IN GOVERNMENT talking about how corrupt the CIA is such as Harry Truman and JFK, and showed a video in that link of congress having a hearing about it and even mentioned a book written by a former deputy director admitting they have plants in workplaces and in the media as well as referring you to links that back up that book dante referenced for you,like the chickenshit coward you are,you ran away from that post of mine not reading it and REFUSE to read that book dante referenced you to in the beginning.

I have to keep repeating the same thing over and over and over again to you trolls cause you wont address the MAJORITY of my posts or answer one simple question i have asked over a hundred time idiot.hahhahahahahahahahahahaahaaa

not my fault your too much of a chickenshit coward to read that book dante referenced to you on his very first post on this thread or read my links that shoot down your lies.

oh and agagin you show you have memeory and reading comprehension problems as well and what a hypocrite you are.anytime i post links that shoot down your lies,like the chickenshit coward you are,you run away and come back with pathetic one liner insults.

your so transparent that your an agent zionist shill sent here to try and derail truth discussions about government corruption like the idiot you are,you ADVERTISE it here.hahahahahahahahahaahahaaaa

not going to keep playing your game troll posting links and information just to watch you run away from it EVERY TIME like the chickenshit coward you are.

this i promise will be my last post with you giving you the attention you seek.

have fun talking to yourself zionist shill.

you trolls laughed at me when I first came on here when i made the point you all have been brainwashed by the CIA,then i make a post that PROVES i am correct about it,that they do have plants in the CIA, you all then run off like the cowards you are changing the subject.

you reaganut trolls can start something,but you cant finish it.

everytime i answer your lies with facts,you evade them running away from them changing the the subject everytime like the cowards you all are.again you can start something,but you cant finish it.you just come back with childish one liners knowing you are cornered. then when I post something from the net,you cowards dismiss it and run away from it.you know it,i know it.

when your proven wrong about something you said,you all evade the facts i posted and whine saying its not about the topic even though YOU all were saying i was a loony for saying it to be true0 what a bunch of fucking whiners and cowards you all are.

your not worth wasting anymore of my time on.I've wasted enough on you trolls as it is.

Like i said,you trolls are so predictable what you will post next you all are a joke.hahahahaa. must suck being you fools when you are so easy to predict.



Thank goodness Ronald Reagan is not in charge of the war on terrorism and his policies towards terrorism have been abandoned. He would be selling weapons to some terrorist supporting county so he could make backroom deals with the various terror organizations like he did in the 80's. Yippie for the new Obama Doctrine of chasing the fuckers down and killing or capturing them. Yippie for Navy SEALS and robots in the sky.

Happy now?

[/QUOTE]

Your posts are schizophrenic... Take your medication before you post. Nobody’s going to read all that gibberish

 

[Jroc]

You are just making things up. Bush threw out any semblance of a doctrine when he invaded Iraq. He even threw out the Powell Doctrine when he invaded Irag. Terrorist groups flourished under both Bush and Reagan. They grew in size and ability to attack western nations and their allies in Africa and Asia.
Reagan getting all the credit for defeating the Soviet Union is hotly debated in the countries that were freed by the collapse of the USSR. They give credit to the massisve demonstations they conducted, the influence of the Pope and Catholic Church, the nationwide strikes and the threat that the USSR would have to remilitarize Eastern Europe with occupations forces rather than the purely defensive/offenseive forces based in those countries.
The claim that Reagan had the "muslim nutjobs" fighting each other is erroneous at best. The war between Irag and Iran and the way Reagan interfered left scars and problems that would leed to many of the difficulties we face today.

as i said before camp,dont waste you time with this zionist shill.He is just seeking attention.

Him and all these reaganuts wont even answer ONE SIMPLE QUESTION I HAVE ASKED OVER A HUNDRED TIMES ON THIS THREAD. and just comes back with insults when you challenge him to read a book that refutes his lies.

you've heard the old saying before.




its advise i plan on following for now on.

Don't be concerned with the trolls or insults or the nonsense, I'm not. This thread gets a large amount of views lately. The comment vs. view indicates alot of people reading the post and not making comments. Rather than ignore the trolls, one can troll them back. It's ok because it gives oppurtunity to answer some of the more outragious or stupid stuff that gets posted. It also gives oppurtunity to make points that may be buried many pages back. You may make a post, but if a few days go by those points may not get made to new viewers The shills make things entertaining and they allow one to hammer points home time and again. They are useful. If one is confident in ones position the bs doesn't matter. People see through it and can determine on their own what makes sense and what doesn't.

The point is while the liberal communist sympathizer nutjobs worked against Reagan and Thatcher. they stuck to their guns and 10s of millions of people are free from the Soviet Empire because of it



[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YtYdjbpBk6A]Reagan at Brandenburg Gate - "tear down this wall" - YouTube[/ame]

 

[Oldstyle]

as i said before camp,dont waste you time with this zionist shill.He is just seeking attention.

Him and all these reaganuts wont even answer ONE SIMPLE QUESTION I HAVE ASKED OVER A HUNDRED TIMES ON THIS THREAD. and just comes back with insults when you challenge him to read a book that refutes his lies.

you've heard the old saying before.




its advise i plan on following for now on.

Don't be concerned with the trolls or insults or the nonsense, I'm not. This thread gets a large amount of views lately. The comment vs. view indicates alot of people reading the post and not making comments. Rather than ignore the trolls, one can troll them back. It's ok because it gives oppurtunity to answer some of the more outragious or stupid stuff that gets posted. It also gives oppurtunity to make points that may be buried many pages back. You may make a post, but if a few days go by those points may not get made to new viewers The shills make things entertaining and they allow one to hammer points home time and again. They are useful. If one is confident in ones position the bs doesn't matter. People see through it and can determine on their own what makes sense and what doesn't.

True,It is amusing watching them run off with their tail between their legs not addressing the majority of the posts you make. the rational objective open minded posters coming on here who are curious,unlike them,will take the time to read that book that dante referrenced in his beginning post and will see that the myth of reagan has been exposed once they read it.

they will see that the trolls ignore the majority of your posts when you prove them wrong you post and wont adress them and will see they wont even answer one simple question i have asked over a hundred times.

well I myself have gotten tired of repeating the same thing over and over again just to see it get ignored and not addressed so i m not going to bother with them anymore.If you can tolerate their stupidity,then all means hang around.

Like I said,im done with them,its gets tiresome having to repeat the same thing over and over and over again just ot watch them ignore it act like i never mentioned it.

I don't see anyone "running" from the nonsense you post, 9/11. I certainly haven't. As I stated earlier...I think you get the majority of your facts from questionable conspiracy web sites...sites that struggle to back up their theories with plausible facts.

You'll end up putting people on ignore because you don't have an intelligent response to them pointing out the huge holes in your conspiracy theories...not because they haven't "answered" your questions.

 

[Jroc]

Don't be concerned with the trolls or insults or the nonsense, I'm not. This thread gets a large amount of views lately. The comment vs. view indicates alot of people reading the post and not making comments. Rather than ignore the trolls, one can troll them back. It's ok because it gives oppurtunity to answer some of the more outragious or stupid stuff that gets posted. It also gives oppurtunity to make points that may be buried many pages back. You may make a post, but if a few days go by those points may not get made to new viewers The shills make things entertaining and they allow one to hammer points home time and again. They are useful. If one is confident in ones position the bs doesn't matter. People see through it and can determine on their own what makes sense and what doesn't.

True,It is amusing watching them run off with their tail between their legs not addressing the majority of the posts you make. the rational objective open minded posters coming on here who are curious,unlike them,will take the time to read that book that dante referrenced in his beginning post and will see that the myth of reagan has been exposed once they read it.

they will see that the trolls ignore the majority of your posts when you prove them wrong you post and wont adress them and will see they wont even answer one simple question i have asked over a hundred times.

well I myself have gotten tired of repeating the same thing over and over again just to see it get ignored and not addressed so i m not going to bother with them anymore.If you can tolerate their stupidity,then all means hang around.

Like I said,im done with them,its gets tiresome having to repeat the same thing over and over and over again just ot watch them ignore it act like i never mentioned it.

I don't see anyone "running" from the nonsense you post, 9/11. I certainly haven't. As I stated earlier...I think you get the majority of your facts from questionable conspiracy web sites...sites that struggle to back up their theories with plausible facts.

You'll end up putting people on ignore because you don't have an intelligent response to them pointing out the huge holes in your conspiracy theories...not because they haven't "answered" your questions.

This is what he wants to derail the thread with his stupidity

 

[Oldstyle]

My prediction is that 9/11 will do what most conspiracy theorists do when their theories are debunked...lash out. It's what you do when you can't argue a viewpoint with reason.

 

[antique4xpu]

president reagan turned over americans to sen. joe mccarthys inquisition long before he ran for anything

against the law , he traded arms for hostages

dick cheney said it would have been terribly wrong to have occupied iraq after the first gulf war ,
but he forgot his own advice later when little george was president

 

[Meathead]

president reagan turned over americans to sen. joe mccarthys inquisition long before he ran for anything

against the law , he traded arms for hostages

dick cheney said it would have been terribly wrong to have occupied iraq after the first gulf war ,
but he forgot his own advice later when little george was president

If there ever is a "ding bat" historical revision of history, then you may seem quite prophetic. Until that time, "pathetic" is a far more appropriate description.

When Reagan challenged Gorbachov to "Tear Down this Wall!!", that was history. Indeed, a moment that illustrated the triumph of the West over the failed ideology of communism. As with the Walls of Jericho, Reagan's trumpets did prevail.

 

[Camp]

As usual with the Reagan worshippers, you do not address one thing that this poster has said. Ofcourse that is because everything he said is accepted fact. He spoke the truth. He pointed out parts of the Reagan history that can not be seriously challanged. You fear that others may continue the discussion on the subjects brought forward, so you deflect and change the subject. You don't want a discussion on how Reagan turned on his friends because he lacked the courage to stand up for them. You don't want to discuss breaking the law and trading arms for hostages because it will lead to the discussion of why he should have been impeached and how he helped terrorism flourish during his administation.

 

[Meathead]

As usual with the Reagan worshippers, you do not address one thing that this poster has said. Ofcourse that is because everything he said is accepted fact. He spoke the truth. He pointed out parts of the Reagan history that can not be seriously challanged. You fear that others may continue the discussion on the subjects brought forward, so you deflect and change the subject. You don't want a discussion on how Reagan turned on his friends because he lacked the courage to stand up for them. You don't want to discuss breaking the law and trading arms for hostages because it will lead to the discussion of why he should have been impeached and how he helped terrorism flourish during his administation.

We did discuss the "dingbat" historical record, did we not? Give it up, history has little regard for that kind of revisionism. What happened happened, and Reagan's legacy is secure except in the minds of those who despair of the fall of communism.

Good luck with that Camp.

 

[bendog]

Actually, those who contend Reagan saved E. Europe would do well to read Commanding Heights, which btw actually treats he and Thatcher very generously, but includes more economic analysis and less ... myth. In a nutshell, Thatcherism really did the trick.

 

[Camp]

As usual with the Reagan worshippers, you do not address one thing that this poster has said. Ofcourse that is because everything he said is accepted fact. He spoke the truth. He pointed out parts of the Reagan history that can not be seriously challanged. You fear that others may continue the discussion on the subjects brought forward, so you deflect and change the subject. You don't want a discussion on how Reagan turned on his friends because he lacked the courage to stand up for them. You don't want to discuss breaking the law and trading arms for hostages because it will lead to the discussion of why he should have been impeached and how he helped terrorism flourish during his administation.

We did discuss the "dingbat" historical record, did we not? Give it up, history has little regard for that kind of revisionism. What happened happened, and Reagan's legacy is secure except in the minds of those who despair of the fall of communism.

Good luck with that Camp.

Once again an attemp is being made to link what I have posted to another poster about another unrelated topic.
"We" have not discussed my postings. All I have seen are deflections to the data and comments I have made. I have seen no arguements that the data supplied in my post are faulty. No posters have actually challanged the data I have supplied, or even my brief analysis of that data.
Ronald Reagan's legacy is not as secure as you wish to believe. It's positive and glorifying stature reached it's peak and is now on the down slide. As historians further removed from his time period review the history more accurately and with a more objective stance a more truthful history is being written. His failure in regards to his terrorism policies and his influence in growing the terrorist community is not being ignored.

 

[Meathead]

Does the fact that you got a "thank'" from 9/11 mean anything to you? Do you understand what is meant by the term of "dingbat"?

 

[CrusaderFrank]

president reagan turned over americans to sen. joe mccarthys inquisition long before he ran for anything

against the law , he traded arms for hostages

dick cheney said it would have been terribly wrong to have occupied iraq after the first gulf war ,
but he forgot his own advice later when little george was president

^ Why you never take LSD before posting on the Internet

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Actually, those who contend Reagan saved E. Europe would do well to read Commanding Heights, which btw actually treats he and Thatcher very generously, but includes more economic analysis and less ... myth. In a nutshell, Thatcherism really did the trick.

Uh huh, the Brits helped for sure, but Reagan was the driving force and provided the leadership

 

[Camp]

Does the fact that you got a "thank'" from 9/11 mean anything to you? Do you understand what is meant by the term of "dingbat"?

The fact that Camp got a thankyou form 9/11 has absolutely nothing to do with the revisionist history of Ronald Reagan. The fact that you consider this person a "dingbat" has nothing to do with revisionist history of Ronald Reagan. None of that has anything to do with the data and analysis I have given. All you can do is deflect from the topic of of your glorified view of Ronald Reeagan and his dismal failure in regards to his horrible policies towards terrorist and terrorist attacks which gave birth to the rise of terrorism as an accepted tactic to be used against the United States. It was those failed policies that led to the growth of a group that believed the United States could be influenced and terrorized into negotiations. That groups name is al Qaeda. We are still fighting them.

 

[LA RAM FAN]

Does the fact that you got a "thank'" from 9/11 mean anything to you? Do you understand what is meant by the term of "dingbat"?

The fact that Camp got a thankyou form 9/11 has absolutely nothing to do with the revisionist history of Ronald Reagan. The fact that you consider this person a "dingbat" has nothing to do with revisionist history of Ronald Reagan. None of that has anything to do with the data and analysis I have given. All you can do is deflect from the topic of of your glorified view of Ronald Reeagan and his dismal failure in regards to his horrible policies towards terrorist and terrorist attacks which gave birth to the rise of terrorism as an accepted tactic to be used against the United States. It was those failed policies that led to the growth of a group that believed the United States could be influenced and terrorized into negotiations. That groups name is al Qaeda. We are still fighting them.

they consider anybody a dingbat everytime they get cornered and frustrated with facts they cant refute as you well already know.worshipping the NET as the gospel truth instead of actual sources printed from the 80's you refer them to .

its funny they call people a dingbat when they wont even answer one simple question asked over a hundred times and call you a dingbat when they refuse to look at or address the facts acting like you never posted it and when you address their lies that THEY brought up,get frustrated and say its off topic.they need to look in the mirror when calling someone a dingbat,

they can only cry and sling shit in defeat like the monkey trolls they are frustrated in their defeat.pretending and folling themselves that documents and articles from the newspapers in the 80's lie.comedy gold.