Potentially. The first rule of problem solving is to identify and understand the problem. It's entirely possible that Boomer just has a pisspoor vocabulary and he didn't actually mean "coward". Given his obvious confusion regarding the meanings of cowardly and bravely, I'd say it's highly probable. The other option is that he's spewing nonsensical rhetoric a la Dubya's "you're either with us or with the terrorists". Take your pick. The point is that these people are not cowards and we shouldn't underestimate them in that way. I'm not quite sure why it bothers some people when the ridiculously obvious is pointed out.
Ceremony marks 1 year since attacks on Canadian soldiers
- Thread starter B00Mer
- Start date
Keep digging yourself in deeper... ya stupid idiot.
I guess you know to always face Cannuck in person, because if you don't, he may become "brave" and shoot you in the back like a coward.
Well, if it was his fault, I'd say he did a pretty good job of making up for it.
Yes it has been cleared up.
You think a back shooting terrorist is "brave" in your words.. nuff said.
Stop being so silly. I never used the word brave, you did. You really should work on your vocabulary
I guess you have to live here to get it. Or where any big event happened. 9/11 and Pearl Harbor dont mean a lot to me. They didnt happen five blocks from where I live. The shooting at the war memorial did. I dont particularly care if the rest of the country wants to pay attention to it or not but for those of us in Ottawa its important. If you want to look the other way and just do things on remembrance day so be it. Thats your choice.
If you're going to compare your view of the terrorist attacker based on Bill Maher's statement... maybe you should take a lesson in literacy and read what Mr. Maher actually said, in full.
Bill Maher - "There was nothing cowardly about the attacks, which were deeds of incredible — albeit perverted — bravery."
I know you're not the sharpest knife in the drawer but at the risk of beating a dead horse, I said they weren't cowards. They weren't. Now, if you think attacking a defenseless person makes you a coward, you must obviously believe that all the men in bomber command were cowards as well. I disagree but you're entitled to your opinion, regardless of how silly it is.
Last edited:
That's right we agree; you clearly stated the terrorist who snuck up behind Cpl. Nathan Cirillo and shot him in the back was not a coward.
Not much more to add to that.
...and he clearly wasn't.
Actually, we don't. I don't believe that the crews working for bomber command were cowards just because they dropped bombs on unsuspecting and helpless civilians
I never said they were, you are the only one making a connection between military and terrorists in your statement.
That's right we agree; you clearly stated the terrorist who snuck up behind Cpl. Nathan Cirillo and shot him in the back was not a coward.
Not much more to add to that.
I agreed "that you clearly stated;" "that the terrorist who snuck up behind Cpl. Nathan Cirillo and shot him in the back was not a coward."
Keep dancing Cannuck.
Cannuck must be one of those inner-city trendies who have never had to deal with real issues or confront the reality of life and base their hipster opinions on internet word-of-mouth and conspiracy theories.
So, when you bomb the crap out out of various countries for no GOOD reason...
(for example Harper was using Canadian forces as ISus/alCIAduh's air force, not to mention say, that
The US state dept. leaked emails fingered a CIA dude as the Lockerbie Bomber ...not a Libyan, eh
"Koussa was the longtime main suspect in the 2011 bombing of Pan Am flight 103 over Lockerbie, Scotland – and was also a CIA source... a CIA source suspected masterminding the Lockerbie bombing...." http://www.usherald.com/state-dept-...whos-a-suspected-terrorist-of-the-worst-kind/ )
YOU GET BLOW BACK, people fighting back, ITS TERRORISM?
say, and whats driving all the refugees out of those countries...teletubbies?
thanks Harper
its on YOU
pS i wonder what some folks round here would call the canadian sniper who had the longest kill record for a time.. I mean shooting a guy from way way over there.....
(for example Harper was using Canadian forces as ISus/alCIAduh's air force, not to mention say, that
The US state dept. leaked emails fingered a CIA dude as the Lockerbie Bomber ...not a Libyan, eh
"Koussa was the longtime main suspect in the 2011 bombing of Pan Am flight 103 over Lockerbie, Scotland – and was also a CIA source... a CIA source suspected masterminding the Lockerbie bombing...." http://www.usherald.com/state-dept-...whos-a-suspected-terrorist-of-the-worst-kind/ )
YOU GET BLOW BACK, people fighting back, ITS TERRORISM?
say, and whats driving all the refugees out of those countries...teletubbies?
thanks Harper
its on YOU
pS i wonder what some folks round here would call the canadian sniper who had the longest kill record for a time.. I mean shooting a guy from way way over there.....
Last edited:
Using your own argument, you must believe so, unless you believe that cowardice can only be a trait of your political opponents.
Depending on my mood, it's either painful or amusing to watch Boomster play word games that wouldn't fool (or interest) a moderately bright eight-year-old, and chuckle over his "victories."
And Cannuck quit being amusing a long time ago....like the little chihuahua that keeps nibbling at your heels......
The nations scions siezed upon a heroic sacrificial act to stiffin the citizens hearts and spines but there was no mountainous landmark to be had so a rubble free alter was employed in its stead.
That is entirely possible but it has nothing to do with the fact that I'm right and you are wrong. The guy was not a coward. Only an idiot would think he was.
Your mind is on vacation but your mouth is working overtime.
Anyone who would shoot a man in the back, is a coward. Anyone who defends a coward is a stupid idiot.