JTF.ORG Forum
General Category => General Discussion => Topic started by: Lisa on October 14, 2008, 08:11:13 PM
-
Hey everyone,
I just promoted Jews Against Obama and JTF!
At about 5:30 p.m. today, there was a pro McCain/Palin counterprotest against the Obama supporters who wore Pinnochio noses, outside the Hyatt Regency hotel. Apparently McCain is staying at the Hyatt tonight, and traveling to Long Island for the last presidential debate which will air tomorrow night.
The usual assortment of moonbats were there.
But towards the end of the protest, a man from WBAI radio approached me for an interview. He asked me why I was supporting McCain. I told him I did not want a black American hating, Jew hating Muslim Marxist in the White House. I said I could not understand why after Jimmy Carter, anyone could be so stupid as to support this man. He asked me where I got my information from, and told him flat out from Jews Against Obama.com and from JTF.org
The reporter then pointed out that some of the Obamunists were calling McCain a terrorist for bombing peasants in Vietnam. He wanted to know what I had to say to that. I told him that American soldiers did not go around killing "civilians" for fun while shouting "Allahu Akbar." I told him that terrorists are civilians, in that they don't wear a soldier's uniform. Of course the guy then asked if I am OK with killing civilians.
But here's where I got stuck. The reporter brought up that famous massacre in Vietnam, and said it was well documented that American soldiers killed civilians in Vietnam. I wanted to bring up the notorious Winter Soldier investigation, but the name temporarily slipped my mind. So I mentioned that "phony" investigation in that hotel where Jane Fonda and John Kerry were involved. I pointed out that the so-called vets were phonies.
So I told him that terrorists routinely use their willing women and children as human shields. He then told me that my logic was scary. And that terrorists could use that as an "excuse" to bomb a building like the World Trade Center, where there were government offices. My response was that when it comes to a "civilian" on the other side and one of our soldiers, I would want the soldier to do whatever it takes to remain unharmed.
Then while he was adjusting his tape recorder, I pointed out that leftists are ashamed of America. I reminded the reporter that there was never a peep out of them when Clinton had the heroic Serbs bombed. I mentioned that the Serbs were our allies in both world wars, and never did a thing to us. So I summed up by saying that it's only when America flexes her military muscle and acts in her interests do the leftists ever complain about civilian casualties. If it's on a so-called "humanitarian mission" like with the Serbs, they're quiet.
Then he went on to the subject of body armor for the troops, and how Republicans are not paying for the necessary armor. And again, this is where I got stuck. I said that we have a voluntary military. I asked if any soldier actually complained about lack of armor. And the guy said that some of them actually did.
So for future reference, how would you guys suggest I handle questions about McCain bombing peasants in Vietnam or the whole body armor issue?
Thanks!
-
Its great you got some points in for the movement but its to bad that the reporter was someone with such a warped prospective. First off he has to be kidding bringing up a situation like the My Lai Mascara and comparing McCain to John Calley. Calley watched his fellow solders being killed by children with bombs strapped on their backs and eventually lost it. McCain and him had nothing in common. Besides America was at war and the situation has nothing in common with Obama's dealings with known terrorist. Its great you were there to represent our point of view but you were fighting a loosing battle trying to convince someone like that.
-
:clap:
Sounds like you did a great job...even if you felt like you got stuck once or twice.
I think just getting Jews Against Obama and The Jewish Task Force out there, is key.
Thank You
-
Great job. You did just fine. The interviewer was obviously more of the same marxist slime.
-
Thanks, CJD, Bullcat and Ben Yehuda.
-
Good job, Lisa!
Of course, it is easy to speak from the comfort of my home, but there are few things I would say in regards to Vietnam:
1) John McCain is not running for presidency of Vietnam
2) Maybe Obama should have run for the office in Vietnam or Cambodia. He could build a perfect dictatorship in the middle of jungle there
3) Sometimes it is needed to sacrifice to prevent larger loses. As in the history of USSR and all other communist states, more people were killed in their own concentration camps and from hunger, than from hands of an enemy.
And the third one is the most important one. Stalin killed more Russians from 1937 thru 1953 than Hitler killed from 1941 thru 1945.
-
Thanks Zvulun.
-
Great Job Lisa!
-
Lisa, I get these kinds of "objections" all the time. In addition to Vietnam, my liberal acquaintances like to bring up Iraq, Hiroshima, and the bombing of Dresden in WWII. This comparing a WAR to a PEACE situation is a completely phony argument. This is what I tell them - it shows a complete lack of logical and moral discernment. There are absolutely no analogies there! Of course, liberal moonbats just l-o-o-o-ve to eraze boundaries between peace and war these days. It's complete moral equivalence for them. However, any person who is not a moron or an evil America-hater would see that there is an ocean of difference between what the righteous side needs to do in order to win a war and what an evil group of ínternal enemies, a fifth column, does to you in an everyday peaceful situation while being allowed to live among you. >:( >:( >:(
-
Sounds like a great interveiw.
-
Great job Lisa first of all John McCain was not bombing civilians he was bombing an Electric generator complex.Second when he mentioned about body armor i would have asked him what bill? and did he offer another bill with a little less pork for our dark friends.I would ask him if he was reporter or advocacy journalist
-
Lisa is fantastic! Thank you!!!
-
Great job Lisa! :dance:
-
Lisa, you did Great being put on the spot without prior knowledge... :clap:
-
Thanks everyone. It was my pleasure.
-
You handled yourself well Lisa!
-
Yay Lisa! You tell 'em! 8)
-
Where can we hear this interview?
-
Your responses gave me a great laugh today. I needed that. I like your boldness. It sounds like the journalist was fishing for the answers he wanted. It sounds like you didn't give him what he wanted. It seems that journalism is now a reciting of the left wing ideologies rather than the actual reporting of nonbias information.
-
You did a great job.
The interviewer sounds like a fool.
You could have accused the interviewer of being a traitor and supporting communists. The interviewer must have liked it when after Kerry came back from Vietnam, he lied and bashed members of the military.
-
In addition, you could also say next time that since the reporter hates the US so much, he should move to a different country.
And link the reporter to Moveon.org, DailyKos and Code Pink.
-
Thanks guys. All good suggestions.
-
That is terrific and you held your ground really well!!!
:clap:
In regards to body armour for the troops, I would bring up that the underlying issue is that President Clinton cut the military so dramatically that Bush had to respond to a diminished military and build it up over a number of years. Also, no president will be able to forsee every challenge in the country and wars in the past were fought with much less or incorrectly routed resources. The armour problem was addressed and when troops in WW2 didn't have needed resources or the French incorrectly took on German troop advances, people then didn't harp on the failures. They learned from them and focused on the enemy. The focus on partisan nitpickings while we are at war with a ruthless, brutal enemy is folly and dangerous.
Also, I would challenge the idea of terrorism. I would say that terrorism is a tactic of the weaker side but the bottom line is we have a war of ideals, peoples and religions. We should yield the right to use terrorism against an enemy if they do not follow the rules of war. (This would be one approach)
You could also say that McCain was drafted and America fought an enemy with imperfect resources and there was no smart bomb technology. Also, that McCain had targeted civilians is actually a completely disproven charge that not even the left wing mainstream media or the Obama campaign have taken on.
-
Great points, North West JTF.
And Angry Chinese Kahanist, I have no idea when the interview will air. And in all honesty, I'm self conscious about hearing my own voice.
-
WOW!! That is GREAT news, Lisa! Baruch Hashem!!
-
Great job Lisa :clap:
-
I guess it probably won't air because you were against the messiah.
-
Great points, North West JTF.
And Angry Chinese Kahanist, I have no idea when the interview will air. And in all honesty, I'm self conscious about hearing my own voice.
Thanks.
It really takes guts in a liberal city to speak your mind. There are crazy leftist protestors who are capable of anything. It's not easy to take on someone who interviews people every day when you're not used to it. I know I couldn't come up with responses when put on the spot like that.
-
Angry Chinese Kahanist, I just went to the website (and that station is very left wing) to look for it, but couldn't find it.
Dan Ben Noah, normally I'm not quick with my mouth. But I think running two blogs, and guest blogging for a friend help, because I get to read lots of news feeds.
-
That is terrific and you held your ground really well!!!
:clap:
In regards to body armour for the troops, I would bring up that the underlying issue is that President Clinton cut the military so dramatically that Bush had to respond to a diminished military and build it up over a number of years. Also, no president will be able to forsee every challenge in the country and wars in the past were fought with much less or incorrectly routed resources. The armour problem was addressed and when troops in WW2 didn't have needed resources or the French incorrectly took on German troop advances, people then didn't harp on the failures. They learned from them and focused on the enemy. The focus on partisan nitpickings while we are at war with a ruthless, brutal enemy is folly and dangerous.
Also, I would challenge the idea of terrorism. I would say that terrorism is a tactic of the weaker side but the bottom line is we have a war of ideals, peoples and religions. We should yield the right to use terrorism against an enemy if they do not follow the rules of war. (This would be one approach)
You could also say that McCain was drafted and America fought an enemy with imperfect resources and there was no smart bomb technology. Also, that McCain had targeted civilians is actually a completely disproven charge that not even the left wing mainstream media or the Obama campaign have taken on.
These are all very good, knowledgeable points, but the problem with using this line of argument is that it implicitly concedes this Geneva Convention BS. We should never accept these draconian and anti-Western so called "standards." If we need to induce collateral damage during a military operation in order to best advance our tactical goals, we must!
-
Thanks, CJD, Bullcat and Ben Yehuda.
You did good- they ALWAYS pull Vietnam out of their A.. WHY? Thats ALL they GOT.
-
Is it possible to download or hear it again?
-
That is terrific and you held your ground really well!!!
:clap:
In regards to body armour for the troops, I would bring up that the underlying issue is that President Clinton cut the military so dramatically that Bush had to respond to a diminished military and build it up over a number of years. Also, no president will be able to forsee every challenge in the country and wars in the past were fought with much less or incorrectly routed resources. The armour problem was addressed and when troops in WW2 didn't have needed resources or the French incorrectly took on German troop advances, people then didn't harp on the failures. They learned from them and focused on the enemy. The focus on partisan nitpickings while we are at war with a ruthless, brutal enemy is folly and dangerous.
Also, I would challenge the idea of terrorism. I would say that terrorism is a tactic of the weaker side but the bottom line is we have a war of ideals, peoples and religions. We should yield the right to use terrorism against an enemy if they do not follow the rules of war. (This would be one approach)
You could also say that McCain was drafted and America fought an enemy with imperfect resources and there was no smart bomb technology. Also, that McCain had targeted civilians is actually a completely disproven charge that not even the left wing mainstream media or the Obama campaign have taken on.
These are all very good, knowledgeable points, but the problem with using this line of argument is that it implicitly concedes this Geneva Convention BS. We should never accept these draconian and anti-Western so called "standards." If we need to induce collateral damage during a military operation in order to best advance our tactical goals, we must!
I'm totally on board with what you're saying but even with these rules, the Muslim terrorists still are the ones in the wrong. So even by these leftist, NWO programs, the Muzzies are still in violation. I think 99% of those international agreements are terrible becasue the left then frame them as "international law." There are no international laws, just agreements that countries have signed or agreed to. The Left is trying to make the World Court a major worldwide insitution and are using cases that everyone can agree on to make the case for its need. They have focused now on Rwanda. Now, most people would say that the people in the genocide should be taken to justice. The problem is that they get everyone on board for a "common sense approach", just like with the Brady Bill and then launch their real agenda. They will then use these courts against America and Israel, AS SOON AS I'M SITTING HERE.
-
Is there a clip to this
-
I suppose if you go on their website you might be able to find something, but I have no interest in hearing myself.
-
It was a mistake. WBAI is a leftwing rathole and will only distort your interview.
-
Well it least it's some kind of publicity. And at least I would be letting those lefties have it.
-
If we can get any publicity I don't see it as a mistake