for example for proper and lawful court, for example, as it allows unlimited incarceration with no charges for example. +expanding powers of federal government and executive branch as such out of all proportion.
Support our troops. Pay your taxes. Snitch on your neighbor. Same old jingoistic jargon designed to demand blind obedience to the state—blind patriotism. A true patriot speaks out against the state when it does wrong; he doesn’t remain silent and follow the herd.
From Attack.com: "President Obama’s opponents have falsely suggested that the President has not been a strong ally to Israel".
Uh....HE HASN'T! Almost everything he says to Israel is negative, like that ridiculous request to have Israel decrease their land to at least 8 miles. That's enough for Muslims to annihilate the Jews completely. Not to mention he doesn't want Jews to build on their own land. If that's what being a strong ally is, then what is Obama when he's not on Israel's side???
I love how a site created to point out inaccuracies and dismiss rumors is being labeled as a snitch site. Instead of spreading fear, why not make your own site to point out any lies or mishaps that Liberals state?
Under the list of type of "attack" (which is a bad term, I admit), all the choices are a form of mass information sharing, except for the rumor choice. That's one out of nine. Even then, it does not ask for a name anywhere on the form. I don't know about you, but most of the people I know do not appear in television interviews or are giving public statements. Reporting of inaccuracies stated by public figures seems like a patriotic duty to me, not snitching. Personally, I am a bit ashamed it has required action by any person or group in our government to get people reporting it. I feel those who say or report misinformation should be required to apologize and redact their statements, and those statements should get as much coverage as the initial claim. I understand libel and slander charges are loose when the recipient is famous, for good reason. I do not believe that this should apply when both parties are famous. If a site like this is all that is possible within the current legal system to try and eliminate the spread of misinformation, so be it. As a final point, the layout of the site is geared towards directing people to the "attacks" proven wrong and spreading this information, rather than reporting new examples.
Would be kind of scary, if AW wasn't the laughing stock on the entire WWW and if Obama wasn't a complete laughing stock of entire Political world. Hell, I think Obama's throwing in the towel here, I don't think anyone will vote for Obama except the ones who religiously watch CNN.