[gr8fuldaniel]

First of all,
I am angry that my thread has been butchered, I have been contacted by Kyran the moderator in a pm and responded to his PM and I am waiting for his response. He did address it here in open forum, in a brief manner. I will do the same. It seems like everyone should be aware of the reasons why your words can be changed to fit somebody elses mold. Let it be known I want to comply with Ettiquette
These address the 2 warnings he gave me.
1) If we cant show bias in our topic title then I see hundreds of targets for censorship.
2) If we have to wait until crooks are judged and condemned formally before we can call them crooks, then we are going to have some busy little moderators around here.
The way ad Homs are described in the definitions:

No Ad Hominems If I were to say, "you are a moron, therefore your views are wrong", that would be an ad hominem. Ad hominem is a logical fallacy. It doesn't help arguments, and it's not tolerated. Other forms of personal attacks should also be reported-just use the 'report' button within the suspected post.

It seems to refer to the way we treat our fellow debaters, rather than the subjects of debate.
3) On throwing in a sub-topic: Thanks, but, No Thanks. That is the bulk of the topic. The whole deal is about Bush getting caught like a little kid stealing a case of oil from his neighbors garage, killing the neighbors kids because they might attack him someday, and trying to backpedal out of it.
I dont want this thread to get hijacked on some tangent :) I just felt something had to be said in the open.
I am willing for Kyran to address the issue in another thread, if necessary. Or here as it relates to this topic. I am not ashamed. Maybe you can point me to a topic with these issues already addressed under an Ettiquette Topic
Just post a link to it here in this thread, I think we all need to know about it.... Before you take a hatchet to our stuff.

Of course Sean overrides all votes :)

Enough of that, Lets argue!

GW Bush appeared before the UN today.

He opened his mouth and somebody elses words came out, as usual. It would have been better, had he entered the room, sat down on his hands and listened to what the world community had to say to him.


Right now I wanted to bring this to the top for debate as the event has just now happened.

ABC News [SIZE=2]Bush Defends Iraq War in U.N. Speech[/SIZE] Bush Defends Decision to Overthrow Saddam Hussein in U.N. Speech, Urges World to Fight Terrorism The Associated Press UNITED NATIONS Sept. 21, 2004 — President Bush defended his decision to invade Iraq in a speech on Tuesday to the United Nations, urging the world community to turn its attention to the fighting the war on terrorism and humanitarian concerns. He told a subdued U.N. General Assembly session that the U.S.-led overthrow of Saddam Hussein delivered the Iraqi people from "an outlawed dictator." Two years after he told the world body that Iraq was a "grave and gathering danger" and challenged delegates to live up to their responsibility, Bush did not dwell on his decision to invade without the consent of the U.N. Security Council. Instead, he urged the world community to "fight radicalism and terror with justice and dignity." Bush said that terrorists believe that "suicide and murder are justified ...And they act on their beliefs." And he cited recent terror acts, including the death of children in their Russian school house.

Do you feel like you are being conned again? Bush and Kerry are both trying to play the war in Iraq as part of the war on terrorism. IMO, War is Terrorism and is like trying to put out a fire with kerosene.

Bush said that terrorists believe that "suicide and murder are justified ...

Isnt that what he is doing? Claiming justifiable homicide. In his unilateral, (with the exception of a few unwitting and and a few other profiteers and most allies joined under duress)

duress; 2 : compulsion by threat; specifically : unlawful constraint

Remember Bushs own cowboy-terrorist threat "If you are not wit us, you are agin us".