- Joined
- Jan 16, 2004
- Messages
- 10,305
- Reaction score
- 0
Maria, if I were you, I would not worried about that. Life is too short!
I know.

Maria, if I were you, I would not worried about that. Life is too short!
Banjo, when 9/11 happened -- don't you think that it is still called " fear-mongerin' " ? After 9/11 hit in America, people lost their trust/faith. And, what about Pentagon when the plane crashed ?
Banjo, when 9/11 happened -- don't you think that it is still called " fear-mongerin' " ? After 9/11 hit in America, people lost their trust/faith. And, what about Pentagon when the plane crashed ?
He had access to intelligence as late as 2 weeks ago. The fundamental threats have not changed. He knows what's going on out there. He also isn't divulging any classified information.
yes. always. probably about a thousand threats per day. that's why we have the biggest defense budget in the world and the 2nd biggest defense budget (China) is nowhere close to it. relax!Isn't there some form of threat everyday??
which is why all Presidents grew old within just 4 yearsIf I would to sit back and worry about everything that is going on. I would not be living life as I am now. I would be in a straight jacket.
yes. always. probably about a thousand threats per day. that's why we have the biggest defense budget in the world and the 2nd biggest defense budget (China) is nowhere close to it. relax!![]()
which is why all Presidents grew old within just 4 years![]()
Then where is he factually wrong?no he doesn't.
I never bought into this "politics of fear" rhetoric. If there really is a danger to our safety and stability, why shouldn't we talk about it? Why shouldn't our leaders tell us what they're going to do about it? So they don't get called "fear-mongers"?Do you know what fear-mongering is? It's a political tactic used in wartime. Politicians use it to frighten the people and alter their political views. 9/11 was exploited by the politicians for political gains. It's sickening.
This is just a classic textbook of fear-mongering.
I never bought into this "politics of fear" rhetoric. If there really is a danger to our safety and stability, why shouldn't we talk about it? Why shouldn't our leaders tell us what they're going to do about it? So they don't get called "fear-mongers"?
If they're grossly exaggerating a small or non-existent threat, I can understand calling it fear-mongering, but as far as terrorism is concerned, I don't see that. It really is a serious threat.
Then where is he factually wrong?
Thanks to the effort of the "fear-mongers". Apparently, they've become a victim of their own success.because the actual threat RARELY occurs in here. It's not like Israel.
I didn't say he still receives the intelligence. I said he had access to it up to two weeks ago. That's enough to have an idea of the threat levels around the world.and how do you know he still receives the intelligence? Beside - in this article, he's just expressing his "grave concern" toward to Obama's policy. Somebody gives this dude a tv and Mr. Matlock dvd collection.
Fear-mongering... what else is new?
and how do you know he still receives the intelligence? Beside - in this article, he's just expressing his "grave concern" toward to Obama's policy. Somebody gives this dude a tv and Mr. Matlock dvd collection.
Re-read this, this time.
Just the musings of an old man that needs to sit down and enjoy the rest of his remaining life..
![]()
Sums it up best. The rest is just crap that he's trying to teach the new "whippersnappers" a lesson.
Gee... I wonder who provoked those terrorists?![]()