US Protecting Known Terrorist!!

[RRocket]

Didn't Bush say those who protect terrorists are terrorists themselves????

http://www.iht.com/articles/2007/04/22/opinion/edherrera.php

 

[RRocket]

Wow..not much to say about harboring terrorists?

 

[Frogman]

Come on, you should know by now that we suffer from mild ADD. If it's not quoted in the post, we "forget" to click on the link. If we DO click on the link, we get distracted by all the ads on the site where the article is.

:lol:

 

[Calabrio]

Wow..not much to say about harboring terrorists?

What screwball, crap, socialist, propaganda newspaper is that? The International Herald Tribune? Are you kidding me? Did you even read the article?

I have trouble sleeping knowing that this guy:

Might jump his $350,000 federal bond and re-engage in his 30 year old terrorist campaign against communists.

If you want to have a discussion, what is YOUR point. Do you think he should be sent to Venezuela? Do you think the threat of torture is untrue? And if it's a real threat, are you now suddenly comfortable with the notion of extraditing people to nations that engage in torture?

Here's a bit of information NOT mentioned in that crap opinion piece you linked to:

Posada has denied any involvement in the bombing, was cleared by a Venezuelan military court and was awaiting the outcome of a civilian court's ruling when he escaped in 1985.

http://www.miamiherald.com/416/story/79712.html

 

[Calabrio]

Additional point, about you're quote:

Now, a personal savings account would be a part of a Social Security retirement system. It would be a part of what you would have to retire when you reach retirement age. As you -- as I mentioned to you earlier, we're going to redesign the current system. If you've retired, you don't have anything to worry about -- third time I've said that. (Laughter.) I'll probably say it three more times. See, in my line of work you got to keep repeating things over and over and over again for the truth to sink in, to kind of catapult the propaganda.

Propoganda is defined as the systematic propagation of a doctrine or cause or of information reflecting the views and interests of those advocating such a doctrine or cause.

So, what exactly is your point? Now that I have provided the proper context, what are is it your trying to say?

 

[MAC1]

This is what I think of the article: