Bush Administration calls CIA, U.S. military "terrorist groups"

Collarspace Discussion Forums

Home Login Search

Bush Administration calls CIA, U.S. military "terrorist groups"

View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest

All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid >> Bush Administration calls CIA, U.S. military "terrorist groups"

Page: [1] 2 next > >>

Login

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

Bush Administration calls CIA, U.S. military "terr... - 8/15/2007 7:48:57 AM

SuzanneKneeling

Posts: 233
Joined: 8/31/2005
Status: offline

Yes, the word has finally been rendered officially meaningless. Your electric teapot is a terrorist, if you feel the urge to call it that. A terrorist is a person or thing that acts in a way that troubles you.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/08/14/AR2007081401662.html?hpid=topnews

Does the administration realize that it has just defined the CIA and several other branches of U.S. military and foreign policy apparatus as terrorist groups? At various times and through a variety of channels we have aided exactly the same types of groups as the Iranian Revolutionary Guard has (e.g., the mujahadin in Afghanistan, right wing death squads in central America, disparate resistance groups elsewhere).

Discuss. Feel free to list any person or object in your life that you would like to designate as a terrorist. Don't worry, there are no rules! (I'll be away most of the day after posting this.)

Post #: 1

RE: Bush Administration calls CIA, U.S. military "... - 8/15/2007 8:07:18 AM

Owner59

Posts: 17033
Joined: 3/14/2006
From: Dirty Jersey
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: SuzanneKneeling

Yes, the word has finally been rendered officially meaningless. Your electric teapot is a terrorist, if you feel the urge to call it that. A terrorist is a person or thing that acts in a way that troubles you.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/08/14/AR2007081401662.html?hpid=topnews

Does the administration realize that it has just defined the CIA and several other branches of U.S. military and foreign policy apparatus as terrorist groups? At various times and through a variety of channels we have aided exactly the same types of groups as the Iranian Revolutionary Guard has (e.g., the mujahadin in Afghanistan, right wing death squads in central America, disparate resistance groups elsewhere).

Discuss. Feel free to list any person or object in your life that you would like to designate as a terrorist. Don't worry, there are no rules! (I'll be away most of the day after posting this.)

My dog is a terrorist.

Fuck`n always wants to take a walk(he`s standing by the door now,ohhhh noooo!!!),always trying to play tug or fetch(obviously, he`s from the middle east),and what`s all this about wanting Milkbones all the time.Fucking terrorist,I tell ya.

_____________________________

"As for our common defense, we reject as false the choice between our safety and our ideals"

President Obama

(in reply to SuzanneKneeling)

Post #: 2

RE: Bush Administration calls CIA, U.S. military "... - 8/15/2007 10:28:54 AM

CuriousLord

Posts: 3911
Joined: 4/3/2007
Status: offline

The title of this thread was misleading, to put it lightly.

(in reply to SuzanneKneeling)

Post #: 3

RE: Bush Administration calls CIA, U.S. military "... - 8/15/2007 10:37:27 AM

SugarMyChurro

Posts: 1912
Joined: 4/26/2007
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: CuriousLord
The title of this thread was misleading, to put it lightly.

No, not really.

But then there are subtleties in the fine art of nomenclature that might evade the language challenged such as yourself.

To help you, I pose the following question: when is an orange not an orange?

(in reply to CuriousLord)

Post #: 4

RE: Bush Administration calls CIA, U.S. military "... - 8/15/2007 10:51:19 AM

CuriousLord

Posts: 3911
Joined: 4/3/2007
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: SugarMyChurro

quote:

ORIGINAL: CuriousLord
The title of this thread was misleading, to put it lightly.

But then there are subtleties in the fine art of nomenclature that might evade the language challenged such as yourself.

I love the ego complimented with irony. "language challenged". Linguistically challenged, perhaps? Or language-challenged?

In any case, your unfounded ego aside, I haven't observed Bush calling either institution of the U.S. "terrorists". The definition provided by the OP seems to be putting words into his mouth.

PS- Please don't start whining again. I get you have an ego and an agenda to defend, but it's really tiresome.

< Message edited by CuriousLord -- 8/15/2007 11:00:13 AM >

(in reply to SugarMyChurro)

Post #: 5

RE: Bush Administration calls CIA, U.S. military "... - 8/15/2007 10:56:55 AM

camille65

Posts: 5746
Joined: 7/11/2007
From: Austin Texas
Status: offline

I didn't find the connection either. But.. my cat is a terrorist. I'm pretty sure the dog is in training too. For sure the woman I stupidly took in because she had no where to go is a terrorist too.
A couch potato, chain smoking terrorist. Can someone please pry her out of my home?

_____________________________

~Love your life! (It is the only one you'll get).

(in reply to CuriousLord)

Post #: 6

RE: Bush Administration calls CIA, U.S. military "... - 8/15/2007 11:02:40 AM

Owner59

Posts: 17033
Joined: 3/14/2006
From: Dirty Jersey
Status: offline

Now he tell`n me,"the Milkbones....or it`s jihad"
And to think,just the other day,he was man`s best friend.

(in reply to CuriousLord)

Post #: 7

RE: Bush Administration calls CIA, U.S. military "... - 8/15/2007 12:04:20 PM

SuzanneKneeling

Posts: 233
Joined: 8/31/2005
Status: offline

A good start on the list, folks. Cats, dogs, and loafing stray humans. I'd like to get some inanimate objects in as well if we can, to show the breadth and depth of the expanded definition of the word. Thanks.

CuriousLord, what part of my post describing the semantic implications of this announcement didn't you understand?

(in reply to CuriousLord)

Post #: 8

RE: Bush Administration calls CIA, U.S. military "... - 8/15/2007 12:10:40 PM

CuriousLord

Posts: 3911
Joined: 4/3/2007
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: SuzanneKneeling

CuriousLord, what part of my post describing the semantic implications of this announcement didn't you understand?

The part where you assumed, and then assigned, a definition that was vague enough as to be silly. I'd suggest you look for a more plausible argument, unless you truly believe that Bush is actually in favor of citing cats and dogs as terrorists, in which case I would feel compelled to suggest a reality check to you.

I can sympathize with you so far that, if this was true, it could be humorous. But, I'm afraid, that's the extent of my sympathy in this case.

(in reply to SuzanneKneeling)

Post #: 9

RE: Bush Administration calls CIA, U.S. military "... - 8/15/2007 12:18:49 PM

Sinergy

Posts: 9383
Joined: 4/26/2004
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: SugarMyChurro

To help you, I pose the following question: when is an orange not an orange?

When it is a illegal alien, border jumping, walmart shopping, right/left wing wacko zealot, sub/slave defining terrorist.

Duh.

Sinergy

_____________________________

"There is a fine line between clever and stupid"
David St. Hubbins "This Is Spinal Tap"

"Every so often you let a word or phrase out and you want to catch it and bring it back. You cant do that, it is gone, gone forever." J. Danforth Quayle

(in reply to SugarMyChurro)

Post #: 10

RE: Bush Administration calls CIA, U.S. military "... - 8/15/2007 12:35:31 PM

SuzanneKneeling

Posts: 233
Joined: 8/31/2005
Status: offline

Okay, CL, I'm starting to think you're having difficulty separating the satirical element of my post from the actual argument. (slowly now...) The cats and dogs part was to make a point. The serious part was the discussion of the new pronouncement and its applicability to our past (and likely present) actions around the world. But the main purpose of the post is to remind people how much power words have - and that their floating definitions can be a very dangerous thing.

I'm also wondering if you read the news article. It is the very first time our country has designated a portion of the military of a sovereign government as a "terrorist group". And the justification for it seems to be no more solid than "they're supporting violent groups that oppose us". We supported similarly violent groups in central America, central Asia, and Indonesia over the past couple of decades. Perhaps you are too young to know of that. These groups covered the same spectrum of intent and tactics that the alleged beneficiaries of the Iranian National Guard do. If indeed the allegations are true (coming from the same people who bent, spindled, mutilated and fabricated the WMD threats for our consumption), then they compare well to the groups we have (and likely still do) support. We may have very good reasons to oppose them and wish their demise. But the word "terrorist" applies no more or less to them as it does to our military - and by extension - us.

In spirit, the free-flowing abuse of the term is not that different from what Bush has rhetorically done all along in Iraq. I.e., despite a wealth of evidence that only 5-10% of the people opposing our invasion/occupation fit the profile of foreign, Al Qaida, terrorists, Bush has frequently characterised the entire insurgency by this tiny sliver of operatives. He did this to keep ma and pa FoxViewer terrorized enough to keep supporting his mistake. But I hope you see how it's dishonest and manipulative.

And finally, the president did not have to come out and literally call our CIA "terrorists" for my post title to be 100% accurate. If the Administration had tweaked the current government definition of poverty level in such a way that my neighbor went from above it to below it, I trust you wouldn't take issue with my stating, "Bush now calling Mr. Smith 'poor'", would you?

(in reply to CuriousLord)

Post #: 11

RE: Bush Administration calls CIA, U.S. military "... - 8/15/2007 1:22:02 PM

CuriousLord

Posts: 3911
Joined: 4/3/2007
Status: offline

It can be rather difficult to tell if someone bashing Bush is doing so for a reason anymore. Alright, (slowly now...)

A floating definition? To me, definitions tend to be a function, with the individual variables defined in context to yield an instance of definition for the instance usage. This is to say, one who takes a knife and stabs a friend in the back without provocation is a murderer. The one who helped the murderer can the other two alone together in a dark, lonely alley with understanding the murderer's intentions might also be labeled a murderer. One might even argue that the police officer who saw all of this about to happen, but did nothing to prevent it, is also a murderer. This is not the word being abused, but, rather, different instances of it.

I suppose your fear is that, should one make a law punishing murderers with the death sentence, with the actual knife-wielder in mind, might be then applied to the one enabling the action, or, even to the timid police officer? That this leaves open space for manipulation of the laws? Perhaps it does, should those involved in such bits be ignorant to the usage of definition in the particular instances, unable to separate them.

The bit you're on about with the U.S. institutions in the past may well be accurate. The U.S. institutions may have acted as terrorist organizations in the past, even in various instances of the term; I'm rather certain that, if nothing else, they certainly did in the American Revolution. Perhaps my youth prospective leaves me more prone to see today's organizations as more separate from those of a earlier generations' moreso than one belonging to such an earlier generation. I do not see the U.S. institutions liable for what was done by those before them in comparable positions. I would point out that this is not a matter of flaw but an instance of differing prospective; I would further defend my prospective, as the notion that an organization, particularly a vast one, being the same over the passage of many years strikes me as rather presumptuous.

Still, to get at your point, you seem to be afraid that the word "terrorist" may be confused at its various levels, leading to manipulation and fear. I do not see how this is the case when one takes into account the variant meanings of words, with regards to a sufficiently intelligent audience. Further, I will not hold a sufficiently intelligent group liable for the possible misunderstandings of those who are unable to follow variant usages.

(in reply to SuzanneKneeling)

Post #: 12

RE: Bush Administration calls CIA, U.S. military "... - 8/15/2007 1:53:25 PM

caitlyn

Posts: 3473
Joined: 12/22/2004
Status: offline

Sometimes, people are just too fucking smart.

_____________________________

I wish I could buy back ...
the woman you stole.

(in reply to CuriousLord)

Post #: 13

RE: Bush Administration calls CIA, U.S. military "... - 8/15/2007 2:16:39 PM

Politesub53

Posts: 14862
Joined: 5/7/2007
Status: offline

The OP is quite correct that the CIA have operated in the same way as the Revolutionary Guards are doing. Bashing the thread title or the jokey comment about teapots doesn`t alter that fact. All it does is show ignorance of recent history.

Yes i know the Iranians are a threat we ignore at our peril. I am just pointing out that the Op is correct.

(in reply to caitlyn)

Post #: 14

RE: Bush Administration calls CIA, U.S. military "... - 8/15/2007 2:21:50 PM

CuriousLord

Posts: 3911
Joined: 4/3/2007
Status: offline

Only if you take the references to the "CIA" and the "U.S. military" to be references to the past. The inaccuracy is along the same lines as if one said to you, "You are a kid." You once were. Is it always true?

(in reply to Politesub53)

Post #: 15

RE: Bush Administration calls CIA, U.S. military "... - 8/15/2007 2:26:38 PM

Alumbrado

Posts: 5560
Status: offline

The corruption of power doesn't just 'grow up'.

Some people might take the assertion that the CIA has changed its modus operandi to be an extraordinary one...

Got any extraordinary evidence?

(in reply to CuriousLord)

Post #: 16

RE: Bush Administration calls CIA, U.S. military "... - 8/15/2007 2:32:34 PM

Politesub53

Posts: 14862
Joined: 5/7/2007
Status: offline

So how far back are we allowed to talk of before it becomes " The past " ?

If the CIA carried out such clandestine ops 20 years ago, is it not conceivable that they are still doing so somewhere or other ? Would the fact Russia and China supply arms to countries that are anti American not make them ( Russia and China ) terrorists too ?

To be honest the arms world is such a murky affair that we would all be suprised at exaclty who supplied what to who ?

(in reply to CuriousLord)

Post #: 17

RE: Bush Administration calls CIA, U.S. military "... - 8/15/2007 2:40:46 PM

Real0ne

Posts: 21189
Joined: 10/25/2004
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: SugarMyChurro

To help you, I pose the following question: when is an orange not an orange?

when the us government says its an orange! Otrherwise its always an orange

_____________________________

"We the Borg" of the us imperialists....resistance is futile

Democracy; The 'People' voted on 'which' amendment?

Yesterdays tinfoil is today's reality!

"No man's life, liberty, or property is safe while the legislature is in session

(in reply to SugarMyChurro)

Post #: 18

RE: Bush Administration calls CIA, U.S. military "... - 8/15/2007 2:43:13 PM

Real0ne

Posts: 21189
Joined: 10/25/2004
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: CuriousLord
The bit you're on about with the U.S. institutions in the past may well be accurate. The U.S. institutions may have acted as terrorist organizations in the past, even in various instances of the term; I'm rather certain that, if nothing else, they certainly did in the American Revolution. Perhaps my youth prospective leaves me more prone to see today's organizations as more separate from those of a earlier generations' moreso than one belonging to such an earlier generation. I do not see the U.S. institutions liable for what was done by those before them in comparable positions. I would point out that this is not a matter of flaw but an instance of differing prospective; I would further defend my prospective, as the notion that an organization, particularly a vast one, being the same over the passage of many years strikes me as rather presumptuous.

cough!

_____________________________

"We the Borg" of the us imperialists....resistance is futile

Democracy; The 'People' voted on 'which' amendment?

Yesterdays tinfoil is today's reality!

"No man's life, liberty, or property is safe while the legislature is in session

(in reply to CuriousLord)

Post #: 19

RE: Bush Administration calls CIA, U.S. military "... - 8/15/2007 2:53:26 PM

CuriousLord

Posts: 3911
Joined: 4/3/2007
Status: offline

Then it does sound like the U.S. organizations took part in some terrorist activities- assuming that's what you're saying- about twenty years back.

Twenty years, to me, though.. is a rather long time. Almost the entirety of my life. It does sound like the U.S. has done some rather distasteful things before I grew up.

(in reply to Politesub53)

Post #: 20

Page: [1] 2 next > >>

All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid >> Bush Administration calls CIA, U.S. military "terrorist groups"

Page: [1] 2 next > >>

Jump to:

New Messages	No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages	Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages	Locked w/o New Messages

Post New Thread

Reply to Message

Post New Poll

Submit Vote

Delete My Own Post

Delete My Own Thread

Rate Posts

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.094