Heh heh heh!
The question about drug lords is relevant: the War on Terror is only a war in the way that the War on Drugs is a war. Our actions in Panama were a result of the War on Terror, but Noriega was tried in a US court and is currently held in a US prison, right?
This whole thread is an embarrassment, SA–or if it isn’t, it should be.
Well, sure, but look what Dubya did to OBL!
-Joe
Still waiting for Smiling Bandit to return to the thread to apologize for starting it before he’d gathered all the facts – mainly that bowing by presidents is not unheard of, and even Nixon bowed to Emperor Hirohito.
Here – you can cut and paste this one – save you time:
*
“Sorry all for starting this OP before I’d gathered all the facts. In future, I pledge to look at multiple sources before getting outraged about something President Obama does, and not just rely on a single network or radio host.”*
And here’s a cut and paste apology for Starving Artist to use:
“Thanks Alienhand for letting me know that Ramzi Yousef was captured in Islamabad with Pakistani cooperation. As I said, things like that do make a difference, so I now acknowledge that a fair trial was held for foreign-captured terrorists in the past, and it worked out pretty well. I promise in future to put in a bit more critical analysis before I jump in with comments, and not just criticize Obama for the sake of criticizing him.”
Please, both of you feel free to cut and paste these apologies, or just post “ya, what he said”.
Have a nice weekend.
Not the same thing at all.
Would you like me to explain why, or would you like to engage in an exercise of logic and intellectual honesty and try to figure it out for yourself?
Additionally…
Please note that one guy does not equal ‘terrorists.’
Would you like to thank me for pointing out that singular does not equal plural?
Feel free to just cut and paste “Hell, yeah!”
Y’all have a nice weekend too now, y’hear? 
Quit quibbling over singular/plural bullshit. You were wrong, you were proven wrong, now admit it.
Your credibility takes a hit with every keystroke you post here.
Fear Itself is kindly reminded that the ‘singular/plural bullshit’ was a secondary, sidebar issue and not pertinent to the main substance of my post.
Looks like you’re in need of a little explaining yourself.
You were wrong. You were proven wrong.
Is that the explanation you need?
No, the exact point is that I wasn’t proven wrong.
C’mon, you’re almost as smart as EP. You wanna try using a little objectivity, logic, and intellectual honesty to see if you can figure it out yourself.
No, please don’t try to explain anything. You could point me towards someone who does have logic and intellectual honesty though. Cause your history sure as shit shows that it’s not you.
Oh, and you fucked up your apology. Just cut and paste it, with no other comments.
That’s what I thought.
Fear, you wanna take a crack at it?
I think you’ve had quite enough crack for one day.
You forget; I am only posting to mock you.
Mock.
So, no attempt at ‘critical analysis’ should be expected from you, is that right?
Plenty, just not to you. You have proved to be unworthy.
Mock.
BWAHAHAHAHA!
The tepidness of your responses betrays both your suspicion that I know something you don’t and your lack of confidence in your ability to figure it out.
Here’s a hint: your mindset, which is typical of this place, is what is keeping you from seeing the answer.
Because you’ve shown so much critical analysis in your posts on how constitutional law works, we are all in awe of your astonishing skills. We are not able to compete with your complete misunderstanding of the issues, your incredible ignorance of the facts, your utter inability to make a cogent point, or your blatant failure to address any argument but your own straw men.
In short, Mr. Artist, I think my point has been soundly proven. You have said nothing vis a vis your ignorant criticism of Obama’s policies that needs be addressed. You are reduced to bluster.
Please let me know if you do a little internet research and come up with a point that isn’t retarded. Until then, I shall be busy elsewhere.
Okay, I’ll include you along with Euphonious Polemic and Fear Itself and ask if you have both the logical ability and intellectual honesty to figure out why I’m right in saying that Alienhand’s cite is bogus.
For surely, if I am so hampered by all the faults you just laid at my feet, you should have no trouble doing so.
Or will you merely defend yourself by claiming, as they have, that I have no credibility, and attempt to use that as an excuse for quailing away from the challenge?
If you think someone’s cite is bogus, why is it my responsibility to prove it?
If you’ll recall, I asked both you and Euphious Polemic (in addition to whether you had the logical ability and intellectual honesty to figure it out on your own) if you wanted me to explain it.
You both declined.
