Free Republic

What happened? They out-freeped us!! http://www.capitalnews.org/

"That drumbeat will continue well past the Bush Administration as long as we have the usual suspects re-elected to Congress. That's why it is so important to utterly defeat them every chance we get. The Alito nomination was the final straw for the 'Rats..."

What we also need to do is take back the media.

Good, someone was repeatedly voting and swung the vote from 55% thinks it getting old against 35% not to 40% old and 50% for re-re-re-investigating.

Someone please explain to me what we've been doing since 2003 if its not constantly re-investigating the War in Iraq.

I watched the number of votes go up and up and up all with the same votes. It's time to balance out the problem. Freep this Poll

http://www.capitalnews.org/

Frankly I think its depressing that this law wasn't already in place. I'm also depressed to know that other adults were being so irresponsible and letting minors have abortions without parental consent.

In the case of the 13 year old; the mother has her own problems and probably isn't the best face to put on TV for the conservative point of view.

First, it just ticks me off when non-political entities get political on their consumers. I vote with my dollars, I think its the responsible thing to do. I boycott France because France never has anything nice to say, or nice to do. I boycott the Boss, the Dixie Chicks, Elton John, Sean Penn, and a few others. Now I'm going to have to boycott Google, which stinks because it WAS so good. I knew they went political when they allowed the dem's to utilize their engine to embarrass Bush in every conceivable way. Hopefully there are more people out there like us because Google will either have to make amends, or they'll just politicize themselves out of existence.

Using a search engine that uses google is no better than using google. If you want to boycott Google, I would think it obviously would include boycotting those search engines that use google.

I'm boycotting them. I'm using Ask Jeeves and its pretty good. We should all start recommending alternatives. Eventually we'll find an equal to google.

Keep up the fight!

>>Sorry I can't keep up with all these posts, I'm 25 behind everyone else. And listen I'll concede here and now that you are much more acquainted with the details of the crusades so you'll have to forgive the broad strokes and random details.

YOUR problem lies in your inability to realize that a supposedly justified motive for war, protecting pilgrimage routes and securing the holy land, in no way justifies that conduct of the men who fight that war.

>>I see, and how is a medieval war supposed to be fought so as to not be thrown in the same boat as your enemy centuries later?Look at the wording you used, "securing"? Lets be honest here can we? its "take back", not "secure". You want to know what isn't justified? What isn't justified is your application of 20th century standards on Christian soldiers from the crusades. I'm not immersed in history every day like yourself but I'm pretty sure pillaging and plundering were the standard of the day. Its how you got to point b from a. I don't think they had rations, tents, horses for all, etc. The crusaders, just like the invaders, habitually took what they wanted and needed right?

How is massacring Jews part of the defense of the holy land? How the sack of Constantinople? How the butchering of the inhabitants of the city of Jerusalem...is that a measured response?

>>There you go again though, "measured response?". What exactly is a measured response? I have to admit I don't remember everything I was taught so I'll pick the one I remember best. The sack of Constantinople was a RESPONSE to the unruly inhabitants of the city whom previously responded to "measured response[s]" but were no longer. What should have been done? and yes I understand it was and is a highly debatable subject.

No one is saying the Muslims were "good guys," but I will say in that in 1453 when Constantinople was under siege by the turks, many of the residents expressed a preference for life under the Sultan to life under the Latins if unification were made a condition of Latin aid.

>>And how does that prove the Crusaders were as bad as the Muslim invaders? The peoples of Constantinople didn't want to unify as their Latin leaders wanted, so? Sounds to me like the Latin leaders wanted to bring peace and even tried to heal the division. And if I were surround on all sides by the most successful pillager of the day, I'd prefer to go quietly too. I think the writing was on the wall at that point.

>>"good guys". Actually I believe this discussion, in part, was started by just such a claim supposedly made by this movie. Wasn't it?

The Sultan would allow the Orthodox to worship as they pleased; not so the Pope.

>>Please, the Sultan had a circle of forces converging on the city, they weren't converging to help them worship.

If you think the "Crusader ideal" was an ever present fact of the Crusades, and not an initial piety quickly forgotten when the chance for pillage and plunder arose, then you really need to read a few books--and I'm not talking about propaganda Web sites or wherever you're getting your Crusader information from, but some well researched, non ideological BOOKS.

>>And what I'm saying is that pillage and plunder were facts of war, not reasons to condemn it. The "crusader ideal", which sounds more like propaganda for me, was long gone by the time the Sultan came knocking. You seem to be making the argument that because war is war, Christians are just as bad and that simply isn't the case. There has to be some shelter for the one who doesn't throw the first punch.
>>You mean books that may have been assigned during a study in Medieval history that you might find assigned by a certain college in Boston on the T?
By the way, I'm a PhD student in Medieval Studies at Boston University. If you want to debate the crusades, I'm
>>While I'd love to pull out all my old texts and have a go with you I'm not that interested. I took a high level course years ago and I distinctly remember having a higher opinion of my Christian brothers than my Muslim ones based on what I read not what I wanted to believe.

I was definitely being sarcastic but if you'd like to explain how many sides there are to the crusades I'd love to hear it. Oh, and if you could specify which one newgeezer is part of that would be helpful too. I just hate being misguided. :)

(I screwed up in my last post by using a "?" instead of a "!") No I don't! Its make believe, and your problem is becoming clearer and clearer to me now. Acting like someone your not is no accomplishment and the fact you regard it so highly is very revealing. Many people fake it every day, and it amazes me that people hold someone who fakes very well in high regard. "You are like so good at stealing, you're like my idol or something". NEVER MIND listening to their (Hollywood) opinions on anything. How do you know they aren't acting again? The medium was a great achievement, how its been used is not. And as one last little side bar, actors didn't invent their profession, neither did the directors, and neither did the producers so I'd stop giving them credit if I were you.

How nuanced of you? And which side of the pentagon do you call your own? Go dance your little dance with someone else. I can't wait to hear the clinton-like statement you're about to post in reply. It will start something, "both sides..." I can feel it.

I'll definitely check it out thanks. I just saw we were soldiers I can't believe i forgot. I watched the others because no one warned me, I was young and being brainwashed. I thank god I ended up a history major.

"You're not going to find clear cut good guys vs. bad guys in that time period."

Thats where your problem lies. The Muslims invade, and because the Christians, who you seem to have a problem with, fought back you believe they should share some blame in all of this. By the way, that was the biggest wimp out I've ever read on here.

You made the original claim about slaughters. Whats your strategy to back up your original claim. We have video tape of Muslims beheading Christians.
Muslim violence is all over the news in a place we call Africa. Did you forget about the Sudan? wait wait wait, what was happening in Kosovo? So how about you name a couple of modern day examples of Christians slaughtering Muslims?

And how do you equate Hollywood with America? wake up and smell the socialism.

"On your side. Not on mine."

I doubt we'd take you anyways. Even Christians have their limits. God forgives, so you got that going for you.
It's really too bad for you though, What's your side contributed? I'm sorry thats a cheap shot, you've really come a long way with your car bombing technology and your suicide bombing tactics. Your ability to wage wars on most major continents at the same time is pretty impressive too.

No, those were the Muslim INVADERS! You see the MUSLIMS invaded and the crusades were all about taking them back. If they had been the original invaders then fine they're blood thirsty but that isn't the case and that's why people should be upset. Muslims came north and invaded Jerusalem, and then were about to invade what today is called Turkey, so the leader of Constantinople asked the Pope for help. Also, any Christians trying to make a religious pilgrimage to Jerusalem were being slaughtered by MUSLIMS.

Bonnie,
I really wish you were right but I have a glaring example of how wishful that thinking really is.
Vietnam.
Look how Hollywood portrayed Vietnam vs.the reality of Vietnam. I took a history class on the Vietnam War taught by a vet who wasn't at all Hawkish and I know it wasn't all good, but neither was it all the bad you hear it was from Hollywood.
They're portrayal is very different in many respects from reality, and when you look at how many younger Americans view the Vietnam War you can literally point out specific movies in their opinions.
Apocalypse Now went a long way in defining the Vietnam War so we all should be concerned about Kingdom of Heaven. How many people visualize a crazy soldier with an ear necklace when they think of Vietnam? Don't forget Platoon, or Causalities of War, or even Born on the 4th of July. Even Forest Gump got in on it with Lieutenant Dan's post war experience.
I can't think of one movie on Vietnam that even tries to defend American action, that even tries to explain the domino theory that was trashed by the left even though it proved itself in the Cold War and is now proving itself again in the Middle East. Oh and name one young American that knows it was JFK that started all of it. I'm sorry but Hollywood is way too effective in brainwashing Americans through "realistic" fiction. If you think about it, they love to portray themselves as making movies as realistic as possible when the only thing realistic is the actors aren't cartoons like in a Disney movie. Other than using real human actors, and they may move to cheaper clones soon, there isn't anything realistic about these movies.
But you know what, there is a bright light at the end of this tunnel and we're all surfing it right now. Hollywood, just like the MsM, has to deal with the Internet and its bloggers. We should all thank god for small favors :)

I love beantown, I live here, but I don't know how much more of this I can take.

Okay, and how long have Nazi war criminals been living on the lamb, 60+years? How much money did they steal from the 10,000,000 Jews they killed? At least the US is trying to recover Bin Laden. You don't see too many German Nazi hunters do you?

STOP THE PRESSES!! I just had an epiphany. Lets send all our liberal pantie waste, draft dodging, intolerant idiots up to Canada, and give asylum to any and all "embarrassed Canadians" who'd rather live in reality?
We keep telling our liberals to get out of the country, and apparently all Canadian liberals want their alpha male counterparts out of the picture. I see nothing but an upside here. We'd probably lessen the trade deficit with all the Enzyte, mascara, nail polish, and bikini briefs we'd be shipping up there.