Kerry: US troops are terrorists

[Jocko]

Wow, it's like 1971 all over again. I wonder who fed Kerry his lines this time? Seriously, who is calling the shots in the DNC? Are they that interested in getting Nixon elected again?

You've got to begin to transfer authority to the Iraqis. And there is no reason, Bob, that young American soldiers need to be going into the homes of Iraqis in the dead of night, terrorizing kids and children, you know, women, breaking sort of the customs of the--of--the historical customs, religious customs. Whether you like it or not... Iraqis should be doing that.

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2005/09/18/ftn/main856364.shtml (in PDF format).

 

[rikzilla]

Just when I start to believe the liberal chant that Bush is a moron and I was wrong to vote for him; you remind me why I was right all along....

Thanks man.
-z

 

[Snide]

Wow...that was a stupid thing to say, especially knowing how the smaller minds reacted to "global test," "I voted for it before I voted against it," etc. I can see this being run with like the Olympic torch by Hannity, etc.

Dems should know that the more intelligently you try to speak, the more careful you need to be. You are likely to at some point choose a wrong word, therefore hurting yourself more than if you were just an idiot who couldn't explain simple things in the first place.

 

[Jocko]

Wow...that was a stupid thing to say, especially knowing how the smaller minds reacted to "global test," "I voted for it before I voted against it," etc. I can see this being run with like the Olympic torch by Hannity, etc.

Dems should know that the more intelligently you try to speak, the more careful you need to be. You are likely to at some point choose a wrong word, therefore hurting yourself more than if you were just an idiot who couldn't explain simple things in the first place.

You know, if this kind of thing was the exception, I'd write it off as an isolated bozo moment, like I used to do with Dean. But the fact of the matter is that it's becoming increasingly clear that this kind of statement is indeed becoming DNC policy.

And of course the usual suspects, who were apoplectic over Bush calling a reporter an @sshole, will give Kerry a pass for calling US soldiers terrorists.

If the political divide is determined to widen, so be it. Just makes it easier to see which side I should be on.

 

[Mark]

I have read your post over and over again and I cannot see one place where Kerry called American troops "terrorists."

You think that complaining about frightening children is the same as calling them suicide bombing, civilian slaughtering terrorists? You guys on the Right really are getting desperate.

 

[jj]

I have read your post over and over again and I cannot see one place where Kerry called American troops "terrorists."

You think that complaining about frightening children is the same as calling them suicide bombing, civilian slaughtering terrorists? You guys on the Right really are getting desperate.

Repetition is the lynchpin of propaganda - Joseph Goebbels.

 

[DavidJames]

One can never underestimate the slimy depths some will sink to demonize those who disagree with them. Then we see the usual suspects taking what Kerry said and contorting it like this.

terrorize (http://www.thefreedictionary.com/dict.asp?Word=terrorized)
1. To fill or overpower with terror; terrify
2. To coerce by intimidation or fear. See Synonyms at frighten.

Tell me friends. When the U.S. attacked Iraq, do you disagree that the those in and around where the missiles landed were "terrorized". So then the U.S. soldiers are terrorists. Of course, are they the same as the terrorists that caused 9/11? Of course not. But your pathetic twisted use of rhetoric says they are.

 

[Perforatu]

You think that complaining about frightening children is the same as calling them suicide bombing, civilian slaughtering terrorists? You guys on the Right really are getting desperate.

I agree, this does seem reaching a bit. Although the word "terrorize" in his quote does have unfortunate connotations, and he could have picked a better one.

 

[kalen]

So, what's the problem with what Kerry said? Is he lying?

 

[Skeptic]

Er, I don't see how he is calling US troops "terrosists" here. He is using the verb "terrorize" in a different, perfectly normal sense--meaning "to spread fear", "to frighten". If I say that a large dog terrorizes the kids on my street, do I mean the dog is a member of Al-Quaeda? No, I only mean they are afraid of it.

The most you can say is that it was foolish of him to use a verb that also means "what terrorists do" as well as "to frighten" or "to alarm". Had he said instead, "Frightening kids and children" (by the way, that's a redundancy) there would be no problem.

 

[Jocko]

I have read your post over and over again and I cannot see one place where Kerry called American troops "terrorists."

Dishonesty from Mark, what a surprise. Okay, basic grammar time.

One who "terrorizes" kids in the dead of night is a ________

It's not hard, just like calling one who deliberately misrepresents what other people posts is called a... a... anyone? Yes Mark, a LIAR.

You think that complaining about frightening children is the same as calling them suicide bombing, civilian slaughtering terrorists? You guys on the Right really are getting desperate.

I think terror is terror. What's your problem with that? Apart from your usual intellectual dishonesty?

Oh, by the way, thank you so much for proving my response to Snide correct... and SO quickly.

 

[Manny]

I agree, this does seem reaching a bit. Although the word "terrorize" in his quote does have unfortunate connotations, and he could have picked a better one.

Well, he was a low-C student at Yale, and his supporters are given to calling the most famous low-C student at Yale an idiot. Perhaps one would be more forgiving of Senator Kerry's word choice if one hadn't heard for months on end how much better at it he is than the President.

 

[Jocko]

Repetition is the lynchpin of propaganda - Joseph Goebbels.

Except Kerry said it, and other Dems are the ones repeating it.

Useful idiots are the surest, swiftest path to tyranny - Josef Stalin.

 

[Mason]

I have read your post over and over again and I cannot see one place where Kerry called American troops "terrorists."

You think that complaining about frightening children is the same as calling them suicide bombing, civilian slaughtering terrorists? You guys on the Right really are getting desperate.

Prior to the WTC bombing, the word "terror" was in common use, and had a commonly understood meaning. Sadly, some people just can't keep up with the changing times and still use it to mean what it means...

(snip)...that young American soldiers need to be going into the homes of Iraqis in the dead of night, terrorizing kids and children, you know...(/snip)

And people immediately jump on it to say that he meant to say it in the context of the "new" definition of terror.

You see, here, he just means to say "terrorize" as a stronger version of "scare". You know, like we did in the old days. However, in the title of the thread, it is used in the manner of "Forgoing legitimate political structure and creating a non-government affiliated group of loosly organized religious extremist suicide bombers who want to destroy the american way of life and using them to scare the public into doing things their way", which is obviously a very easy mistake to make, given the context the word was used in.

 

[Mark]

I agree, this does seem reaching a bit. Although the word "terrorize" in his quote does have unfortunate connotations, and he could have picked a better one.

That I agree with. His choice of adjective was foolish...expecially when the Right Wing (Like Jocko) will leap on something like that and make every effort to turn it into something it was not. I am sure Limbaugh is having a field day with it; and all the ignorant dittoheads are chanting "Rush is God!" in response.

 

[Mark]

Dishonesty from Mark, what a surprise. Okay, basic grammar time.

One who "terrorizes" kids in the dead of night is a ________

It's not hard, just like calling one who deliberately misrepresents what other people posts is called a... a... anyone? Yes Mark, a LIAR.



I think terror is terror. What's your problem with that? Apart from your usual intellectual dishonesty?

Oh, by the way, thank you so much for proving my response to Snide correct... and SO quickly.

Pathetic. I would say you are better than this, but you aren't.

 

[Jocko]

Pathetic. I would say you are better than this, but you aren't.

What do you call one who "terrorizes," Mark?

 

[kalen]

Wow, it's like 1971 all over again. I wonder who fed Kerry his lines this time?

At least Kerry can speak in public without having to rely on a pre-written speech. I wouldn't fault him so much if he made a slip-up like the one above. (ie. Iraqi forces should be the ones terrorizing children.)

 

[Grammatron]

That I agree with. His choice of adjective was foolish....

I'll agree with that Mark.

His comments are far, far, far from calling US troops terrorists -- at least in the context we use today. However, from political perspective that's a very dumb thing to say.

What do you call one who "terrorizes," Mark?

A terrorizer, duh

 

[Snide]

One who "terrorizes" kids in the dead of night is a ________

Terrorizer of kids (in the dead of night even). Definitely not a Terrorist; not in the context of what we know terrorists to be in today's world.

Still a stupid thing for Kerry to say, and you're proving for me why, just as quickly as Mark proved in your mind what you were saying. Plenty like you will make the leap.

To wit: May you never be painting your house with your son and say, "Son, don't worry about running out of paint. I always apply it liberally."

For at that moment, according to your logic, he could accurately call you a "Liberal."


(yes, liberally is an adverb and terrorize is a verb, but it is in effect the same silly leap of logic to call you a liberal for using the term)