Were our Founding Fathers terrorists?

Yes it was. First of all one idiot in a cave ranting and raving about how evil the west is isn't what I'd call a formal declaration of war. He has no acknowledged backing from any country, no uniformed troops, nothing that would make it a legal declaration.
Click to expand...

I am afraid that it more than one idiot in a cave whom I wouldnt call an idiot, because he told us in 2004 how he would bog us down in Iraq. So far he has been correct. He was smart enough to take out the WTC.

Our founding fathers were not a recognized nation when they first banded together to start the ruckus with Britian either. They didnt have a national army either and no uniforms at first. So was the Decleration of Independence legal in your opinion?
 
I am afraid that it more than one idiot in a cave whom I wouldnt call an idiot, because he told us in 2004 how he would bog us down in Iraq. So far he has been correct. He was smart enough to take out the WTC.

Our founding fathers were not a recognized nation when they first banded together to start the ruckus with Britian either. They didnt have a national army either and no uniforms at first. So was the Decleration of Independence legal in your opinion?
Click to expand...

Yes, he's an idiot. You can admire the bastard all you want but I won't. I wonder if he's in Iraq? I really doubt it and I really doubt he has control of a sizable faction there as well. He hasn't bogged anyone down, our silly rules of engagement have.

Our founding fathers didn't start a ruckus with Britian:rolleyes: they were responding to England's unfair and deceptive governing.

Once again you just can't seem to understand. Did Washington gut British children? Did he saw off any British heads? Did the Americans commit obvious immoral attocites against helpless people? If so then fine they're terrorists but the burden of proof is on you.

This is a waste of time. You go ahead and justify any actions you want because you think America was founded on behavior of blood thirsty tyrants. At least that's what it sounds like.
 
I can’t believe people are actually having a debate like this. This really makes me lose some respect that I had for some posters.

We truly are our own worst enemy.
 
I can’t believe people are actually having a debate like this. This really makes me lose some respect that I had for some posters.

We truly are our own worst enemy.
Click to expand...

Not following you? Are you upset that some would call men like Washington, Henry, Jefferson, Franklin, Adams, etc... terrorists or are you upset that people would refute it?
 
founding fathers

During the War with England ther were some pretty confused folks. They didn't even have left or right feet! Colonist could not own steel shovels, by English law they had to use wooden spades. Ever try to dig a hole with a wooden shovel while wearing your boots on the wrong feet? That'd make anyone steamed.
 
Yes, he's an idiot. You can admire the bastard all you want but I won't.
Click to expand...
Recognizing that a man is intelligent and crafty does not equate to admiration. What definition of "idiot" are you using? He's college educated so you could easily say that anyone who isn't falls below him in the "smartness" scale. He was also smart enough to plan those attacks and smart enough to know the impact they would have. A clever enough economist to realize the financial impact of his actions.

Just because someone recognizes that he's no an http://209.161.33.50/dictionary/idiot - "2: a foolish or stupid person" - does not mean he's being admired.
Our founding fathers didn't start a ruckus with Britian they were responding to England's unfair and deceptive governing.
Click to expand...
An Al-Queda was responding to America's unfair and deceptive actions in the Middle East. Do some people still believe they attacked us out of the blue because they "hate freedom"?
Wrong.

There are moral absolutes—only you choose not to see them.
Click to expand...
Matter of opinion. Morality is a human creation; without humans there are no morals and thus there can be no universal morality. As I've mentioned to others, in two or three centuries the very thought of eating the cooked flesh of an animal might seem as heinous to everyone on Earth as the thought of rape seems to us.
 
You equate wisdom with higher education and I almost fell out of my chair. I remember going to college with people who weren't smart enough to pick their nose.:D As far as admiring bin Laden I wrote at the end, that's what it sounds like. I really don't believe the guy's that smart at all. If he would have been smart he would have remained behind the shadows after he planned the attack. Instead of running for his life now he'd be free to continue fighting.

So, America deserved to have 3,000 civilians killed by collapsing a building one them?

Yes, yes I do believe we were attacked by those bastards because they do hate freedom. Look at their culture and them tell me they love freedom.:rolleyes:

As far as moral relativism goes, I really find it disturbing that people cannot (or will not) call evil for what it is. Have you seen the video of Nick Berg? Watch that and then tell me it's a matter of opinion.

Morality is NOT a human creation. It is God's creation. There is a standard of human conduct that should be observed the world over no matter who you are.
 
An Al-Queda was responding to America's unfair and deceptive actions in the Middle East. Do some people still believe they attacked us out of the blue because they "hate freedom"?
Click to expand...

Oh dear Lord. The lack of common sense (to put it nicely) in this thread is utterly amazing.

Of course they hate freedom—what the hell do you think shari’a law is all about? You can’t even draw a benign cartoon about Mohammed without having to go into hiding, for fear you’ll get your head sawed off.
 
You equate wisdom with higher education and I almost fell out of my chair. I remember going to college with people who weren't smart enough to pick their nose. As far as admiring bin Laden I wrote at the end, that's what it sounds like. I really don't believe the guy's that smart at all. If he would have been smart he would have remained behind the shadows after he planned the attack. Instead of running for his life now he'd be free to continue fighting.
Click to expand...
No, I simply pointed out that higher education is one sign that a person is probably not mentally deficient. I doubt eh veracity of any claim that a college student cannot locate his nose with his finger. Pure exaggeration that adds zero credence to your point.

he's smart enough that he hasn't been found. I guess those shadows are serving him well.
So, America deserved to have 3,000 civilians killed by collapsing a building one them?
Click to expand...
Did I say that? I simply pointed out that the attacks were not unprovoked. America is not the squeaky clean bastion of honor and justice some would like to pretend it is.
Yes, yes I do believe we were attacked by those bastards because they do hate freedom. Look at their culture and them tell me they love freedom.
Click to expand...
Then you believe wrong and you lack an understanding of the very culture you wish to insult.
As far as moral relativism goes, I really find it disturbing that people cannot (or will not) call evil for what it is. Have you seen the video of Nick Berg? Watch that and then tell me it's a matter of opinion.
Click to expand...
I do believe that is evil. However that doesn't mean everyone believes it is evil nor that many believed it was evil a thousand years ago or that people will still believe it is evil a thousand years from now.
Morality is NOT a human creation. It is God's creation. There is a standard of human conduct that should be observed the world over no matter who you are.
Click to expand...
For those that don't believe in your god your statements holds little water. That standard changes because society evolves as we evolve. Again, many centuries from now eating meat may be considered incredibly evil. Waging war may be considered evil, owning a tool designed specifically for the destruction of human life may be considered evil.
Oh dear Lord. The lack of common sense (to put it nicely) in this thread is utterly amazing.

Of course they hate freedom—what the hell do you think shari’a law is all about? You can’t even draw a benign cartoon about Mohammed without having to go into hiding, for fear you’ll get your head sawed off.
Click to expand...
The problem with your claim is that you're implying your definition of freedom is the only one that counts. I don't have the freedom to pay a woman for sex or smoke marijuana in this country or I'll find myself behind bars. Does that mean those who support such draconian laws hate freedom as well?
 
its easy to be misled

All this was inspired by the principle - which is quite true in itself - that in the big lie there is always a certain force of credibility; because the broad masses of a nation are always more easily corrupted in the deeper strata of their emotional nature than consciously or voluntarily; and thus in the primitive simplicity of their minds they more readily fall victims to the big lie than the small lie, since they themselves often tell small lies in little matters but would be ashamed to resort to large-scale falsehoods. It would never come into their heads to fabricate colossal untruths, and they would not believe that others could have the impudence to distort the truth so infamously. Even though the facts which prove this to be so may be brought clearly to their minds, they will still doubt and waver and will continue to think that there may be some other explanation. For the grossly impudent lie always leaves traces behind it, even after it has been nailed down, a fact which is known to all expert liars in this world and to all who conspire together in the art of lying. These people know only too well how to use falsehood for the basest purposes. ...
Click to expand...

"Most people,sometime in their lives, stumble across truth.
Most jump up, brush themselves off, and hurry on about their business
as if nothing had happened."
-Winston Churchhill

"I feel sorry for the man who, after reading the daily newspaper,
goes to bed believing he knows something of what's going on in the world"
-Henry Louis Mencken

"To preserve liberty, it is essential that the whole body of people always possess arms..."
-Senator Richard Henry Lee, 1788, First U.S. Senate.

"Men are not Prisoners of fate, but only prisoners of their own minds"
-Franklin D. Roosevelt

"Beware the leader who bangs the drums of war in order to whip the citizenry into a patriotic fervor, for patriotism is indeed a double-edged sword. It both emboldens the blood, just as it narrows the mind. And when the drums of war have reached a fever pitch and the blood boils with hate and the mind has closed, the leader will have no need in seizing the rights of the citizenry. Rather, the citizenry, infused with fear and blinded by patriotism, will offer up all of their rights unto the leader and gladly so.
How do I know? For this is what I have done. And I am Caesar."

None are more hopelessly enslaved than those who falsely believe they are free. - Johann Wolfgang von Goethe, German philosopher

Liberty has never come from Government. Liberty has always come from the subjects of it.The history of Liberty is a history of resistance.
The history of Liberty is a history of limitations of Governmental power, NOT the increase of it.

Woodrow Wilson.

It was Samuel Adams who said,
"Now what liberty is this when property can be taken without permission."

Letter from Dr. James P. Hilton:

Trust us,
you know we'll always do what's right by you.
Trust us,
we needed The Patriot Act and now we need Patriot Act Two.

Trust us,
this has absolutely nothing to do with abridging everybody's liberty.
Trust us,
it matters not that the founders warned of just this proclivity.

Trust us,
and if you don't, you've got no damn right.
Trust us,
even citizens can be whisked off anytime, day or night.

Trust us,
secret searches, self censorship, and gag orders
Are not despotic.
Trust us,
if you question our motives you must be a criminal, unpatriotic.

Trust us,
you better join us now because the hour is growing late.
Trust us,
you wouldn't want to be declared an enemy of the state.

LONG LIVE THE AMERICAN REVOLUTION!
 
Last edited:
The problem with your claim is that you're implying your definition of freedom is the only one that counts. I don't have the freedom to pay a woman for sex or smoke marijuana in this country or I'll find myself behind bars. Does that mean those who support such draconian laws hate freedom as well?
Click to expand...

My definition—no. But there must be a consensus on what freedom means for a society to function. By your logic no one is truly free unless they are allowed to engage in any act they feel compelled to carry out. So why stop with the chronic, or the ladies in red—why not say we aren’t truly free unless we are able to murder or rape whomever want?
 
My definition—no. But there must be a consensus on what freedom means for a society to function. By your logic no one is truly free unless they are allowed to engage in any act they feel compelled to carry out. So why stop with the chronic, or the ladies in red—why not say we aren’t truly free unless we are able to murder or rape whomever want?
Click to expand...
Not necessarily. A consensus on what freedom means in this country may be different from the consensus on what freedom means in another country.

I stop with the chronic and ladies in red and don't move onto murder and rape because the former actions - by themselves - harm no one directly while the latter actions - by themselves - inherently lead to the direct harm of others.

The point is that our freedom may not mean the same thing as their freedom. The idea that we were attacked solely because they "hate freedom" and completely ignoring the factors of not only American foreign policy but direct American actions in the middle east is as ridiculous as saying that the religion issue doesn't enter into the argument at all.
 
Redworm...I have to say I respect your opinion, even though I do not agree with it at all. Some of the things you say and comments you make, I am like, "wow, this is where I have to be respectful of another persons free speech right"

I do believe that is evil. However that doesn't mean everyone believes it is evil nor that many believed it was evil a thousand years ago or that people will still believe it is evil a thousand years from now.
Click to expand...

I don't know what you believe, but EVIL is EVIL is EVIL is EVIL. The same things that were evil 1000's of years ago will remain to be evil another 1000 years from now. Yes, HUMAN ideals (for lack of a better term) evolve as humans change, that is a fact, but that does not mean that EVIL changes, some humans will continue to think EVIL is only what they prescribe it to be, when in fact it is a constant.

For those that don't believe in your god your statements holds little water. That standard changes because society evolves as we evolve. Again, many centuries from now eating meat may be considered incredibly evil. Waging war may be considered evil, owning a tool designed specifically for the destruction of human life may be considered evil.
Click to expand...

Are you agnostic? I have strong beliefs in what I KNOW to be true about God and creation and yes, I agree that they are my beliefs and that you have the right to make your own informed decision, but how can anyone refute the fact that morality is also constant? How would anyone try to change morality?

Did I say that? I simply pointed out that the attacks were not unprovoked. America is not the squeaky clean bastion of honor and justice some would like to pretend it is.
Click to expand...

Please tell me what attack on Al-Queda by the United States prompted them to attack our financial district in New York, our "security headquarters" at the Pentagon, or the farmers field in PA. (Before you say that the field in PA was not an intended target, I know that, I am just saying) None of those citizens deserved to die or to be put through a terrible tragedy like that.

I think the fact that killing civilians, in any way, unprovoked, will always be against anyone's moral character disproves your point that morality changes through the times.
 
I don't know what you believe, but EVIL is EVIL is EVIL is EVIL. The same things that were evil 1000's of years ago will remain to be evil another 1000 years from now. Yes, HUMAN ideals (for lack of a better term) evolve as humans change, that is a fact, but that does not mean that EVIL changes, some humans will continue to think EVIL is only what they prescribe it to be, when in fact it is a constant.
Click to expand...
not necessarily. my point is that good and evil are solely constructs of the human mind. no, if a thousand years from now humans believe that eating meat is "evil" then that doesn't really mean my eating a cheeseburger tonight was an evil act, does it?

I guess it all depends on whether you believe there's a higher power that dictates moral absolutes. I do not believe there is and thus I cannot accept moral absolutes. If human beings had not evolved to the point of achieving sentience then there would be no evil. Wolves are known to kill for sport, male dolphins are known to surround females and forcibly take their turns yet we do no refer to these acts as murder and rape. Without humans evil does not exist because there is no higher intelligence above humans (again, barring any intelligent species elsewhere in the universe...yet that still wouldn't dictate our moral code).
Are you agnostic? I have strong beliefs in what I KNOW to be true about God and creation and yes, I agree that they are my beliefs and that you have the right to make your own informed decision, but how can anyone refute the fact that morality is also constant? How would anyone try to change morality?
Click to expand...
Absolutely. I'm afraid of taking this too far into religious territory so if you're really interested in my beliefs let me know and I'll be happy to take it to PMs so this thread doesn't get locked.

Thousands of years ago slavery was perfectly moral, even among those that believe what christians believe today. Moral standards change over time.
Please tell me what attack on Al-Queda by the United States prompted them to attack our financial district in New York, our "security headquarters" at the Pentagon, or the farmers field in PA. (Before you say that the field in PA was not an intended target, I know that, I am just saying) None of those citizens deserved to die or to be put through a terrible tragedy like that.

I think the fact that killing civilians, in any way, unprovoked, will always be against anyone's moral character disproves your point that morality changes through the times.
Click to expand...
I never said any citizen deserved it but that doesn't change the fact that the attacks were not simply out of the blue. American foreign policy had a lot to do with Al-Queda's decisions.

It was not unprovoked. Simply looking at bin laden's history or the history of afghanistan or the history of islam in the past century or the history of American actions in the middle east will provide with many handfuls of reasons why a group of extremists would be provoked into attacking us.

That's not to say I agree with any of those reasons but to claim that none exist is simply wrong.
 
None of those citizens deserved to die or to be put through a terrible tragedy like that.
Click to expand...

Of course they didn't. But what about the civilian casualties we are wreaking on Iraq right now.. 3,000 is suddenly a drop in the bucket. Are what we are doing more moral than what they did? Why? Does God favor us more? Or is it because we are wearing uniforms (most of the time)?

If there is absolute morality and evil is evil is evil, then what do we need God for?
 
If there is absolute morality and evil is evil is evil
Click to expand...
if there is absolute morality and "evil is evil is evil" then killing is always evil regardless of whether or not the killer has an american flag on his shoulder and the killed is hollerin' "jihad!" :o

but it's too convenient to forget that bit sometimes...
 
It makes sense to have troops believe the enemy is inhuman, or they may hesitate when they need to pull the trigger.

It does not make sense for the public and politicians to feel that way. We shouldn't underestimate our enemy by saying they are "idiots". It would be our downfall to take on such arrogance.
 
Our founding fathers didn't start a ruckus with Britian they were responding to England's unfair and deceptive governing.
Click to expand...

The intention was to start a ruckus with Britian to polarize the colonists into action and taking sides. I dont think the colonists were going to start a war by kissing the king's feet, you start a fight with a bloody nose. The king fell for it and sent troops who started doing many of the things our Bill of Rights defends against. This was the intention of our founding fathers.

Victory in war is defined as breaking the enemy's will to fight. I think we have given some the will to fight from some of our unintended and uninformed actions. You dont have to admire your enemy but you better know him.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top