TexasCHLforum.com

Yea Yea Yea, I know its not an actual news station/site according to the messiah.

Yet it is the only "news" website that I can find anything on Pearl Harbor on its main page (the only other places were news paper sites... LA times and USA Today).

Has it really come down to this? Have Americans forgotten Pearl Harbor? Have we forgotten what happened on that ill fated day? Have we forgotten those who perished in that dreadful attack? Or do we just not care?

I find it pathetic and disgusting that none of the actual news sites have anything on Pearl Harbor.

{SIGH} Maybe it wasn't a date which will live in infamy?

I just dunno', maybe it's not politically correct to remember the deaths and mayhem that rained from the skies at the hands of our new friends? Perhaps we should apologize for shooting back? I just dunno'.

They don't want to remember Pearl Harbor, because if they do, then they have to remember 9/11. And if they have to remember 9/11, then the morally bankrupt cowards have confess that the real name of "Overseas Contingency Operations" is "The Global War on Terror."

I expect that pretty soon the administration will begin referring to all of WW2 as "the war of American aggression in Europe and Asia," and to the Civil War as "the capitalists' war to keep the black man down."

It's all part of "Newspeak," my friend.... Newspeak.

The Annoyed Man wrote:They don't want to remember Pearl Harbor, because if they do, then they have to remember 9/11. And if they have to remember 9/11, then the morally bankrupt cowards have confess that the real name of "Overseas Contingency Operations" is "The Global War on Terror."

I expect that pretty soon the administration will begin referring to all of WW2 as "the war of American aggression in Europe and Asia," and to the Civil War as "the capitalists' war to keep the black man down."

It's all part of "Newspeak," my friend.... Newspeak.

Could it also be that those who are trying to take us places we won't like when we get there would like to minimize the risk that might arise from reminding us of what happens when you pretend that deadly enemies are peaceful people? For our political aristocracy, that would indeed be an "inconvenient truth."

The Administration can rename it The War On Terror when it is reminded of that fact the next time Islamic jihad makes a major hit on U.S. a interest. Fort Hood wasn't compelling enough for the believers. Now, if the Salahis had been strapped with explosives when they crashed the White House gala the other night, that might have put things back in proper perspective. Stay tuned.

casingpoint wrote:The Administration can rename it The War On Terror when it is reminded of that fact the next time Islamic jihad makes a major hit on U.S. a interest. Fort Hood wasn't compelling enough for the believers. Now, if the Salahis had been strapped with explosives when they crashed the White House gala the other night, that might have put things back in proper perspective. Stay tuned.

Personally, I think they were able to crash the party because of their last name.

Thank goodness for Fox news. They are there for you and yours where others wouldn't have the nerve to cover events like they do. They often bring tears to my eyes.

Purplehood wrote:

casingpoint wrote:The Administration can rename it The War On Terror when it is reminded of that fact the next time Islamic jihad makes a major hit on U.S. a interest. Fort Hood wasn't compelling enough for the believers. Now, if the Salahis had been strapped with explosives when they crashed the White House gala the other night, that might have put things back in proper perspective. Stay tuned.

Personally, I think they were able to crash the party because of their last name.

You know, I had the same thought back when the party-crasher story first broke... not a serious thought, I was just telling myself a little joke.

Zee wrote:Thank goodness for Fox news. They are there for you and yours where others wouldn't have the nerve to cover events like they do. They often bring tears to my eyes.

I know what you mean. On the very rare occassions that I've seen MSNBC, I've had to force back tears also...some as big as road apples.

Oldgringo wrote:

Zee wrote:Thank goodness for Fox news. They are there for you and yours where others wouldn't have the nerve to cover events like they do. They often bring tears to my eyes.

I know what you mean. On the very rare occassions that I've seen MSNBC, I've had to force back tears also...some as big as road apples.

I used to see MSNBC at the gym each morning. They are certainly biased but a little more subtle than Fox. I used to see CNN as even but they tilt to the left a little lately.

I take the time to channel surf. I don't want to hear the same stuff or I could easily be fooled into anything force-fed to me. I take the news in from many sources, most show some favoritism, then see what to make of it all. Some days I just don't know what to make of it.

Zee wrote:

Some days I just don't know what to make of it.

Me either. I still say, 'let's fire all 545 of'em and start over'.