georgesbluegirl

They both had pens so that they could make notes on what the other said which is, by the way, allowed: you can see Kerry and Bush doing so during most of the debate. It's so they can make the "something___ just said" comments. Serious conspiracy theory here.

Because The Masses, as a rule, are dumb.

Cite, please.

Nobody should be that naive. Our "do-gooder" traits were appealed to in the mission in Iraq, but politically, oil definitely played a role. That's the politics of war: self-interest. Why is it the most far out wacky Right propaganda can be put out and no one says anything about it, but as soon as a radically different view emerges it's shot down? Maybe it's my Monday Paranoia.

It's not supposed to be fact - Dan Brown has said that over and over. In the beginning of the book he asserts that Opus Dei and the Priory of Sion actually exist and that the examinations of well-known artworks in the books context are accurate. Other than that and much of the history and "conspiracy theory," it's just a fun read. It wouldn't be if it was ALL fabricated, but anybody who would understand the book anyway should understand that it's not to be taken as fact. Duh. By the way, has anyone here actually read it?

I'm with Tess on this one, I'm posting because it's interesting to see what people formulate to damn Halloween. This is a rather illegitimate argument. But these things can get pretty funny...

Yeah, seriously...no more Halloween debates, I think my head will explode.

Oh dear. I've done my homework on this guy (because he's the one who keeps calling Harry Potter a "witch manual"). Trust me, if he really came from occult backgrounds then he was horribly misinformed. Most of the information that he lists on his sites, as well as here, is way off. He talks about witches in conjunction with satanism, apparently unaware that the two are very different and that most Wiccans will get horribly offended if you confuse the two. Did you know, for example, that the Wiccan pentagram is different from the satanist pentagram? His facts about the Druids aren't even right (the hollowing out of pumpkins and turnips is from a legend, not a specific religious practice, and it was turnips first). Plus there's no proof that they sacrificed humans, and that has been stated again and again by the level-headed. The bonfires he talks about are for Beltaine, not Samhain. His understanding of pagan, Wiccan, etc. customs seems very basic to me.

Sounds like a rumor to me - I haven't found anything yet and you'd think liberal sources would jump on that.

That (Hamas) was way long ago. He's since renounced his ties to any form of extremist Islam and now supports schools with his money instead. He hasn't been anything near a "radical" for a while now. And he's due to release a greatest hits thing soon and I think the profits go to some international aid organization...but that might just be word of mouth, so don't quote me on that.

Christians occasionally forget that they are not the ONLY ones proclaiming that theirs is the ONLY way. Az, I get what you're saying. Your arguments (some of which are similar to my beliefs) provoke some excellent reflection and, hopefully, discussion.

Sounds good. I can't find it (although I just did a cursory search) so I'll check some debunking sites. Can't vouch for its validity though.

Not up to us to figure out I guess. But - some lit trivia - according to Dante (in the Inferno), he's with Brutus in the worst part of Hell, which is reserved for traitors.

Ummm...I'd do a quick survey of WB and see the treatment and "heat" that Islam gets...just food for thought.

OH plus the quote I cited before was from something different...if you google it, you'll find it (it was made to a reporter AFTER the speech, more offhand).

LOL, you all take me too seriously. Keep in mind that I say most things with a sarcastic tone. Actually the oppression of women in fundamentalish Islamic countries is a major feminist issue...I don't know how anyone would have missed that. Maybe because media doesn't cover it much.

Forgive me no hypocrisy was meant...but being a news addict, it's hard for me to remember that not everyone would have heard about the quote since such a huge stink happened over it. Don't you see the problem though? Bigamy is a cultural creation and pedophilia is a violation of a child's basic human rights OBVIOUSLY, and homosexuality is neither created by culture nor violating two partners' rights (as they give consent). It's ridiculous to lump all of that together, and pretty darn insensitive. Agreed on point 3.

Here's a link to an article about Repubs criticizing Santorum's remark. Before anyone yells at me for using CNN (which apparently some people have a problem with) Fox and a bunch of other news sites had the same story but this one was written with more clarity and context. I do want to become a CNN foreign correspondant in the future though.... CNN.com...Santorum's quote

Whoa, there's no need to get irate. I was making a valid point. On Sen. Santorum: it's easy enough to find, just about every major network or news mag reported it because it caused such a huge stir. I assumed most people had heard it so I didn't feel the need to cite directly (even my uncles knew about it and all they watch is Fox!). And yes, the media DOES put out bunk...didn't the Repubs just have a field day with Dan Rather? It works vice versa too - I'm just saying, from lots of personal experience as a news junkie, it is immensely important to check out the validity of the information you're getting. A college paper is not always a reliable source, especially with columns, because you're naturally going to get more slant than you would with professional writers. And there is ABSOLUTELY junk news on the internet...I mean, you really cannot trust things from non-professional sources, I've found, until you find some references. The Internet is fair game, so you can say whatever you want, including things that aren't fact. As Mr. Rather just found out, checking sources for reliability before assuming truth is imperative. And the Ted Kennedy statement (Lord that man irritates me) has nothing to do with news - I am talking about specific articles, documents and authors. And I take it you're anti-gun control, by the way?

Heh, don't be so snarky. Yes, I'm perfectly well aware of all the human rights atrocities that go on in many fundamentalist (key word) Islamic countries - it's despicable and I was in no way trying to excuse it. Obviously. Trust me, there are lots of people, liberal and conservative alike, who work against this and you'll find plenty of feminists more than a bit peeved over it! Of course, it's hard to bash it out of people's heads when it's been ingrained for so long. Sigh.

Has anybody ever read the whole Koran? It's worth it so you can look at it contextually and not just line by line. There are certainly lines in the Bible that make non-Christians gasp in shock. By the way, I'm in the middle of Reading Lolita in Tehran and I recommend it to everyone...it's great and really gives perspective on the situation of women in Iran.

I'm not being antagonistic...it's just important to check your sources before you put information out as fact. There's a lot of "bunk" floating around the internet, let alone in journalism. Usually, you can find sources pretty quickly with a search engine. It's just a suggestion...you don't want to post something untrue!

Look, I'm not discrediting. I'm just pointing out that a college newspaper doesn't have the same experience or resources behind it that another professional resource might.

I was referring to the part about "peace loving mosques" somebody said before sort of sarcastically. People don't seem to be able to understand that there are plenty of normal, everyday Muslims who don't hate Western society. And about the last bit, that was just me being saucy.

Hmm that sounds a bit ignorant... anyway, as Jon Stewart said, "Hurrah! We finally got the guy that...um...wrote 'Peace Train'...Well, the flight was tagged by two fighter jets and, naturally, a Moonshadow." And also...if we're trying to enforce a no-fly list, wouldn't it be a good idea to stop the people on it at the gate? Not that, you know, mid-air isn't a great place to start.