NationStates Jolt Archive

You again. :mad:


Yep..and its still true...
and you are still quite mistaken.

A word of advice: cut back on "puny brains" "crock of bull" and such-like flamebait. For one, refraining from pathetic insults might make folks more willing to engage in substantive conversation with you (if that's what you're looking for).

This from someone whose only contribution to this thread is insults. What a hypocrit.

This from someone whose only contribution to this thread is insults. What a hypocrit.
The discussion has calmed down a bit, lets not ratchet it back up.

Yep..and its still true...
and you are still quite mistaken.
You still haven't answered my question. Why do you hate americans?
What did we ever do to you?

You still haven't answered my question. Why do you hate americans?
What did we ever do to you?


Ive already answered your question on this thread.
I AM an american, and proud to be one.
I love this country as much as any Republican.

I love it enough to the point that I am sickened by the actions of the man in office who is doing these kinds of things in my country's name.

If YOU loved your country, so would you.

Ive already answered your question on this thread.
I AM an american, and proud to be one.
I love this country as much as any Republican.

I love it enough to the point that I am sickened by the actions of the man in office who is doing these kinds of things in my country's name.

If YOU loved your country, so would you.
then how come you ain't republican? You hate them too?
And wasn't there someone running around here that said slavery was ok?

then how come you ain't republican? You hate them too?
And wasn't there someone running around here that said slavery was ok?


Why am I not a Republican?

Why would I support the party of the very man whos actions are ruining this country and its name?

Do I hate Republicans?

No.
Thats silly.
Do you believe that all Democrats think alike?
Or even all liberals?

Thats absurd.

The people that I DO hate, are the ones who are completely brainwashed by what they hear from Rush Limbaugh, and the Hannitys and the O'Reillys of the country, that they no longer even know what the truth is.

Like thinking that we are fighting Al -Qaeda in Iraq right now.

:mad: Whittier is one of those sad pathetic right-wingists who thinks that his word should be like the word of God. His constant proclamations that Brits showing this video are terrorists, while he is just as guilty, if not more guilty of terrorism for his own actions. As well as saying that people should be murdered for stating their opions is just as bad as Saddam was.

Hell, it's more like Stalin! You're not terrorist, your worse, YOU ARE A FUCKING COMMUNIST!!! I hope no one take this hypocritical bastard seriously. :mad:

:mad: Whittier is one of those sad pathetic right-wingists who thinks that his word should be like the word of God. His constant proclamations that Brits showing this video are terrorists, while he is just as guilty, if not more guilty of terrorism for his own actions. As well as saying that people should be murdered for stating their opions is just as bad as Saddam was.

Hell, it's more like Stalin! You're not terrorist, your worse, YOU ARE A FUCKING COMMUNIST!!! I hope no one take this hypocritical bastard seriously. :mad:
typical Al Qaeda supporter.

:mad: Whittier is one of those sad pathetic right-wingists who thinks that his word should be like the word of God. His constant proclamations that Brits showing this video are terrorists, while he is just as guilty, if not more guilty of terrorism for his own actions. As well as saying that people should be murdered for stating their opions is just as bad as Saddam was.

Hell, it's more like Stalin! You're not terrorist, your worse, YOU ARE A FUCKING COMMUNIST!!! I hope no one take this hypocritical bastard seriously. :mad:
I never killed anyone in cold blood. Never killed any defenseless women or children.
Fact is, I've never killed any one period.

typical Al Qaeda supporter.

from what you have posted in this topic it could be said that you are a typical bush supporter. Willing to let him do all your thinking for you and not care how he runs the country. Just a thought.

from what you have posted in this topic it could be said that you are a typical bush supporter. Willing to let him do all your thinking for you and not care how he runs the country. Just a thought.

Bush has done a lot of good for this nation. ANd in response to an earlier comment, I don't listen to Rush Limbaugh or Mr. O Reilly.
I get my information from different sources and make up my own mind.

Bush has done a lot of good for this nation.

care to give an example? as far as i can see he really hasnt done anyone much good.

[QUOTE=The Black Forrest]All it shows is that there are many bad muslims out there. Just like there are many bad Christians.
[QUOTE]
Maybe the word 'people' would do there.

I'm not 15 I am twice that.
I know alot of the people in the Congress, and the california legislature, including two of the last governors of California.
I done actual candidacy for Congress, that is how I know those people.
Now I am in the military. That is how I know what you are saying is a crock of bull.
And the you have a wierd way of interpreting the news buddy.


I can tell by the way that you write that you are no more than 16, or are just plain fucking stupid. Pardon the French, I rarely use profanity except when pushed to the edge of my patience. Whittier-, you really should stop trying to validate your arguement. You have absolutely no solid ground. You have contradicted yourself several times now, and it is best for your dignity(whats left of it anyway) that you just stop. You say you are thirty years old, how old were you when you ran for Congress? Who in the California Legislature do you know? Which governors did you know? I have read your posts and have either been greatly infuriated by your sheer stupidity or infuriated by it. I am sick of your pathetic attempts to argue.

Leave, and don't try to post another argument untill:
1) You can formulate a valid argument.
2) You can write properly.
3) You can actually respond to peoples' challenges to your argument without simply calling them un-American.

care to give an example? as far as i can see he really hasnt done anyone much good.
tax breaks
increased the pay of the military
medicare prescriptions for seniors
kicked the talbans ass
passed the partial birth abortion law banning it.
kicked saddams ass
saved us from the dictatorial world govt. that kyoto would have imposed on us.

I can tell by the way that you write that you are no more than 16, or are just plain fucking stupid. Pardon the French, I rarely use profanity except when pushed to the edge of my patience. Whittier-, you really should stop trying to validate your arguement. You have absolutely no solid ground. You have contradicted yourself several times now, and it is best for your dignity(whats left of it anyway) that you just stop. You say you are thirty years old, how old were you when you ran for Congress? Who in the California Legislature do you know? Which governors did you know? I have read your posts and have either been greatly infuriated by your sheer stupidity or infuriated by it. I am sick of your pathetic attempts to argue.

Leave, and don't try to post another argument untill:
1) You can formulate a valid argument.
2) You can write properly.
3) You can actually respond to peoples' challenges to your argument without simply calling them un-American.

whatever you say, al qaeda supporter
liberals always ignore the evidence when its before there eyes cause their hatred of america blinds them to it.

I can tell by the way that you write that you are no more than 16, or are just plain fucking stupid. Pardon the French, I rarely use profanity except when pushed to the edge of my patience. Whittier-, you really should stop trying to validate your arguement. You have absolutely no solid ground. You have contradicted yourself several times now, and it is best for your dignity(whats left of it anyway) that you just stop. You say you are thirty years old, how old were you when you ran for Congress? Who in the California Legislature do you know? Which governors did you know? I have read your posts and have either been greatly infuriated by your sheer stupidity or infuriated by it. I am sick of your pathetic attempts to argue.

Leave, and don't try to post another argument untill:
1) You can formulate a valid argument.
2) You can write properly.
3) You can actually respond to peoples' challenges to your argument without simply calling them un-American.

If you dont' like then dont' read it. I got as more right to free speech than you do. And you sir, are not in any place to be attacking people's character or their authority.
You are the one showing sheer stupidity with your blind hatred of america and of bush.

Muqtada al-Sadr - a member of al-Qaeda?
Residents of the Sunni Triangle - all members of al-Qaeda?

Here's the skinny


so you're saying we should just run and hide?
I hide from no one.
That's a non-sequitur. The point of the article I linked was that the U.S. is fighting a predominantly Iraqi- (not al-Qaeda/foreign fighter) -driven insurgency. Since you did not dispute the argument laid out in the article, I presume you concede the fact that it is Iraqis who make up the bulk of the resistance.

Very well, then. On to the question of what to do now.
Here's a quick run-through of the major errors committed by the U.S.:
1. Taking out Saddam AND disbanding his military + purge the Baathists.
Result: with force of oppression gone, all manner of mayhem begins, plus an opening is created for radical Islamists.
2. Trusting the siren songs of neocons and their little pet, Chalabi, that Iraq could be quickly and with little pain turned into a stable democratic nation, domino effect of democratic transformation all across the Middle East and such-like wishful thinking.
Result: poor planning for the aftermath of the military campaign and overreliance on people like Chalabi and Allawi who simply do not have much of a powerbase inside Iraq (and thus are not capable of maintaining order without foreign troops) => widespread resentment of the occupation.
3. Ignore the interests of France, Russia, China, Germany. Instead of bargaining for their support, Rummy & Co. figured they could handle Iraq all by themselves.
Result: "Coalition of the Willing" consisting of the US, UK and a bunch of pygmy states (oh, and Japan and SKorea -- stationed as far away from the hotspots as possible).

What could the U.S. do to salvage this mess:
1. Set a firm deadline (preferably a date before Jan. 2005) for complete withdrawal from Iraq. -- Because right now the locals don't believe you ever going to leave unless forced to do so.
2. Abide by that deadline.
3. Disavow any plans to maintain permanent military bases in Iraq.
4. Disavow any plans to keep a 8,000-strong "embassy" (a.k.a. shadow government) in Baghdad

The worries about potential security vacuum, should foreign troops withdraw, are a tad overblown -- after all, they and Iraqis who back them are the main targets of violence. The U.S. has already abandoned Fallujah and vast stretches of the Anbar Province (http://www.montereyherald.com/mld/montereyherald/news/9200682.htm) to the locals and the world didn't end. The Kurds are firmly in control of their part of Iraq. Al-Sistani and SCIRI might have to duke it out with Muqtada al-Sadr for preeminence among the Shiites, but so far Shiite parts have been quiet (except for times when the U.S. tried to dislodge Muqtada from Najaf -- a campaign that had been quietly abandoned, of course).

Thus, the task for outside powers would be to keep Sunnis, Shiites and Kurds from encroaching on each other's patch, help them find a way to cohabit in Baghdad somehow, and share powers on the national level (Lebanon comes to mind as a possible model). As the debates around the proposed Iraqi Constitution have shown, this isn't an easy task at all, but could probably be accomplished through diplomatic means (promises of political, economic & military support -- coupled with threats to direct it the rival factions) better through an unpopular foreign occupation.

Granted, the resulting Iraq would not be quite as democratic or market-oriented or as in thrall to America and friendly to Israel as the neocons had hoped, but I should think it's a better alternative to prolonged guerilla war that does nothing but inflame Iraqi hostility to all things Western -- and thus directly aids the cause of al-Qaeda.

OK, 'nuff for tonight :)

tax breaks
increased the pay of the military
medicare prescriptions for seniors
kicked the talbans ass
passed the partial birth abortion law banning it.
kicked saddams ass
saved us from the dictatorial world govt. that kyoto would have imposed on us.

ok lets get started:
beating the taliban and saddam has increased the number of attackes against american, british and european countries in retaliation for the invasions he has launched
abortion laws i will leave seeing as that depends on your own opinion as to if abortion is bad or not.
What world government? Is this another one of those conspiracy theories that people have come up with or what?
medicare and tax breaks i wont argue that these are good things so i guess you have proved your point here to a certain extent.

typical Al Qaeda supporter.

Why, you little ungrateful piece of shit! I am far more American than you will ever be. I was in Vietnam. I fought against the Communists, just so could be a little bastard and state your mind. I have seen what life is like outside of America. You are just like all those other little school boys who can't formulate an opinion except what Daddy tells you. You have absolutely no idea what it means to be American. You have no idea what it means to be patriotic. You have absolutely no idea how hard people work just so you can go on your pathetically supported rants about how anyone who disagrees with you should die. I am utterly amazed. Perplexed. In all my years I have never know anyone so ungrateful. You really need to rethink your life you little bastard.

That's a non-sequitur. The point of the article I linked was that the U.S. is fighting a predominantly Iraqi- (not al-Qaeda/foreign fighter) -driven insurgency. Since you did not dispute the argument laid out in the article, I presume you concede the fact that it is Iraqis who make up the bulk of the resistance.

Very well, then. On to the question of what to do now.
Here's a quick run-through of the major errors committed by the U.S.:
1. Taking out Saddam AND disbanding his military + purge the Baathists.
Result: with force of oppression gone, all manner of mayhem begins, plus an opening is created for radical Islamists.
2. Trusting the siren songs of neocons and their little pet, Chalabi, that Iraq could be quickly and with little pain turned into a stable democratic nation, domino effect of democratic transformation all across the Middle East and such-like wishful thinking.
Result: poor planning for the aftermath of the military campaign and overreliance on people like Chalabi and Allawi who simply do not have much of a powerbase inside Iraq (and thus are not capable of maintaining order without foreign troops) => widespread resentment of the occupation.
3. Ignore the interests of France, Russia, China, Germany. Instead of bargaining for their support, Rummy & Co. figured they could handle Iraq all by themselves.
Result: "Coalition of the Willing" consisting of the US, UK and a bunch of pygmy states (oh, and Japan and SKorea -- stationed as far away from the hotspots as possible).

What could the U.S. do to salvage this mess:
1. Set a firm deadline (preferably a date before Jan. 2005) for complete withdrawal from Iraq. -- Because right now the locals don't believe you ever going to leave unless forced to do so.
2. Abide by that deadline.
3. Disavow any plans to maintain permanent military bases in Iraq.
4. Disavow any plans to keep a 8,000-strong "embassy" (a.k.a. shadow government) in Baghdad

The worries about potential security vacuum, should foreign troops withdraw, are a tad overblown -- after all, they and Iraqis who back them are the main targets of violence. The U.S. has already abandoned Fallujah and vast stretches of the Anbar Province (http://www.montereyherald.com/mld/montereyherald/news/9200682.htm) to the locals and the world didn't end. The Kurds are firmly in control of their part of Iraq. Al-Sistani and SCIRI might have to duke it out with Muqtada al-Sadr for preeminence among the Shiites, but so far Shiite parts have been quiet (except for times when the U.S. tried to dislodge Muqtada from Najaf -- a campaign that had been quietly abandoned, of course).

Thus, the task for outside powers would be to keep Sunnis, Shiites and Kurds from encroaching on each other's patch, help them find a way to cohabit in Baghdad somehow, and share powers on the national level (Lebanon comes to mind as a possible model). As the debates around the proposed Iraqi Constitution have shown, this isn't an easy task at all, but could probably be accomplished through diplomatic means (promises of political, economic & military support -- coupled with threats to direct it the rival factions) better through an unpopular foreign occupation.

Granted, the resulting Iraq would not be quite as democratic or market-oriented or as in thrall to America and friendly to Israel as the neocons had hoped, but I should think it's a better alternative to prolonged guerilla war that does nothing but inflame Iraqi hostility to all things Western -- and thus directly aids the cause of al-Qaeda.

OK, 'nuff for tonight :)

sounds good to me.

No this is just the 30 pages summary. THe link between Iraq and Al Qaeda is in the original 300 page report.

lol. A link between al qaeda ind iraq would be a rather important fact. funny if they exclude such a thing in a summary.

You know, you're trolling in these forums, Whittier, have made youvery very increditable in my eyes. Just so you know.

ok lets get started:
beating the taliban and saddam has increased the number of attackes against american, british and european countries in retaliation for the invasions he has launched
abortion laws i will leave seeing as that depends on your own opinion as to if abortion is bad or not.
What world government? Is this another one of those conspiracy theories that people have come up with or what?
medicare and tax breaks i wont argue that these are good things so i guess you have proved your point here to a certain extent.
but i'll concede that more needs to be done.
the healthcare reform bill does not go far enough
no child left behind had unintended negative consequences.
illegal immigrants are being allowed to collect social security cause Bush made some kind of executive order that says they could even if they never paid taxes.
bush has done some good but there is some stuff that still needs to be done or that has gotten worse. but can still be fixed.

tax breaks
increased the pay of the military
medicare prescriptions for seniors
kicked the talbans ass
passed the partial birth abortion law banning it.
kicked saddams ass
saved us from the dictatorial world govt. that kyoto would have imposed on us.

Problem:
Increased pay but slashed veterens benefits.
The "discount card" program costs more and is way more confusing that many seniors have stopped taking their meds(from a friend that works with the elderly).
Taliban is on the way back.
Yet to prove that Sadaam was a clear and present danger to the US.
Kyoto is bad how?

Why, you little ungrateful piece of shit! I am far more American than you will ever be. I was in Vietnam. I fought against the Communists, just so could be a little bastard and state your mind. I have seen what life is like outside of America. You are just like all those other little school boys who can't formulate an opinion except what Daddy tells you. You have absolutely no idea what it means to be American. You have no idea what it means to be patriotic. You have absolutely no idea how hard people work just so you can go on your pathetically supported rants about how anyone who disagrees with you should die. I am utterly amazed. Perplexed. In all my years I have never know anyone so ungrateful. You really need to rethink your life you little bastard.
you need to rethink yours.
you need to go to church and get saved.

lol. A link between al qaeda ind iraq would be a rather important fact. funny if they exclude such a thing in a summary.

You know, you're trolling in these forums, Whittier, have made youvery very increditable in my eyes. Just so you know.
free discussion is trolling in your eyes.
cause you can't stand that people have the right to say things you don't agree with.

Problem:
Increased pay but slashed veterens benefits.
The "discount card" program costs more and is way more confusing that many seniors have stopped taking their meds(from a friend that works with the elderly).
Taliban is on the way back.
Yet to prove that Sadaam was a clear and present danger to the US.
Kyoto is bad how?
I'll concede those points except the last one.
Kyoto, as I recall, blames the US for something like 90% of the world's pollution and would have forced us to pass compliance laws that would have violated our own constitution and our nation's bill of rights.
just banning industry in america is not going to cure the world's pollution problem. All nations must accept they have equal responsibility to their own peoples to work with other nations to preserve the environment and restore it.
though some in the industry say that this is just part of a natural cycle, I would note that our effect on it is just as natural. Just as it was natural for us pollute, it is only natural for us to want to clean up the environment, hence our actions are already part of natures design.

That's a non-sequitur. The point of the article I linked was that the U.S. is fighting a predominantly Iraqi- (not al-Qaeda/foreign fighter) -driven insurgency. Since you did not dispute the argument laid out in the article, I presume you concede the fact that it is Iraqis who make up the bulk of the resistance.

Very well, then. On to the question of what to do now.
Here's a quick run-through of the major errors committed by the U.S.:
1. Taking out Saddam AND disbanding his military + purge the Baathists.
Result: with force of oppression gone, all manner of mayhem begins, plus an opening is created for radical Islamists.
2. Trusting the siren songs of neocons and their little pet, Chalabi, that Iraq could be quickly and with little pain turned into a stable democratic nation, domino effect of democratic transformation all across the Middle East and such-like wishful thinking.
Result: poor planning for the aftermath of the military campaign and overreliance on people like Chalabi and Allawi who simply do not have much of a powerbase inside Iraq (and thus are not capable of maintaining order without foreign troops) => widespread resentment of the occupation.
3. Ignore the interests of France, Russia, China, Germany. Instead of bargaining for their support, Rummy & Co. figured they could handle Iraq all by themselves.
Result: "Coalition of the Willing" consisting of the US, UK and a bunch of pygmy states (oh, and Japan and SKorea -- stationed as far away from the hotspots as possible).

What could the U.S. do to salvage this mess:
1. Set a firm deadline (preferably a date before Jan. 2005) for complete withdrawal from Iraq. -- Because right now the locals don't believe you ever going to leave unless forced to do so.
2. Abide by that deadline.
3. Disavow any plans to maintain permanent military bases in Iraq.
4. Disavow any plans to keep a 8,000-strong "embassy" (a.k.a. shadow government) in Baghdad

The worries about potential security vacuum, should foreign troops withdraw, are a tad overblown -- after all, they and Iraqis who back them are the main targets of violence. The U.S. has already abandoned Fallujah and vast stretches of the Anbar Province (http://www.montereyherald.com/mld/montereyherald/news/9200682.htm) to the locals and the world didn't end. The Kurds are firmly in control of their part of Iraq. Al-Sistani and SCIRI might have to duke it out with Muqtada al-Sadr for preeminence among the Shiites, but so far Shiite parts have been quiet (except for times when the U.S. tried to dislodge Muqtada from Najaf -- a campaign that had been quietly abandoned, of course).

Thus, the task for outside powers would be to keep Sunnis, Shiites and Kurds from encroaching on each other's patch, help them find a way to cohabit in Baghdad somehow, and share powers on the national level (Lebanon comes to mind as a possible model). As the debates around the proposed Iraqi Constitution have shown, this isn't an easy task at all, but could probably be accomplished through diplomatic means (promises of political, economic & military support -- coupled with threats to direct it the rival factions) better through an unpopular foreign occupation.

Granted, the resulting Iraq would not be quite as democratic or market-oriented or as in thrall to America and friendly to Israel as the neocons had hoped, but I should think it's a better alternative to prolonged guerilla war that does nothing but inflame Iraqi hostility to all things Western -- and thus directly aids the cause of al-Qaeda.

OK, 'nuff for tonight :)

The US didnt really purge the Baathists like they should have, Some experts still believe that it are Baathists who resist the American forces (in Fallujah for example). I cant say they're wrong, because there are still many Baathists running around free (and in some cases part ofthe new army).
Whats more, many of these new soldiers use what they learn from the American troops at night to fight their daylight allies. In time, the US is training these men to continue a guerilla war and when the US leaves a Civil War.

The only alternative to a Civil war is Shiite rule under a dictator. Its also the best and most democratic solution as they make up 65% of Iraqs population. In this case the Kurds would be fine while the Sunni pay for their support to Saddam in the past 30 yrs. The Kurds could offcourse declare independence and get Turkye and Syria on their ass. There's no way the three parties would share power and a real democracy is a joke.
Oh and there isnt much to be duked out with Al-Sadr, Al Sistani is an ayatollah, the Shiites will all(including Al Sadrs followers) listen to whatever Al Sistani tells them.

But i agree on most of the other things you posted.

free discussion is trolling in your eyes.
cause you can't stand that people have the right to say things you don't agree with.

No, trolling is writing BS. And writing BS is what you do. Cause you say there is a tie between iraq and al qaeda and refere to the 911 report. When people ask for a link you give thjem a summary where the word Iraq isn't mentioned, and while reading the full report (including footnotes that you don't seem to have done) they say that the evidence they have for such ties are more likely to be untrue then true.

And, this isn't the 1st thread i think you have been trolling in

The US didnt really purge the Baathists like they should have, Some experts still believe that it are Baathists who resist the American forces (in Fallujah for example). I cant say they're wrong, because there are still many Baathists running around free (and in some cases part ofthe new army).
Whats more, many of these new soldiers use what they learn from the American troops at night to fight their daylight allies. In time, the US is training these men to continue a guerilla war and when the US leaves a Civil War.

The only alternative to a Civil war is Shiite rule under a dictator. Its also the best and most democratic solution as they make up 65% of Iraqs population. In this case the Kurds would be fine while the Sunni pay for their support to Saddam in the past 30 yrs. The Kurds could offcourse declare independence and get Turkye and Syria on their ass. There's no way the three parties would share power and a real democracy is a joke.
Oh and there isnt much to be duked out with Al-Sadr, Al Sistani is an ayatollah, the Shiites will all(including Al Sadrs followers) listen to whatever Al Sistani tells them.

But i agree on most of the other things you posted.

we tried bringing back some of the baathists. in some cases it worked and in some it didn't. some of the people in the new police and new army ar former baathists.
and allowing revenge against the sunnis will only keep the cycle of violence going, that is why we have to keep troops there to prevent that happening.

No, trolling is writing BS. And writing BS is what you do. Cause you say there is a tie between iraq and al qaeda and refere to the 911 report. When people ask for a link you give thjem a summary where the word Iraq isn't mentioned, and while reading the full report (including footnotes that you don't seem to have done) they say that the evidence they have for such ties are more likely to be untrue then true.

And, this isn't the 1st thread i think you have been trolling in
dude you don't even know what trolling is.

No, trolling is writing BS. And writing BS is what you do. Cause you say there is a tie between iraq and al qaeda and refere to the 911 report. When people ask for a link you give thjem a summary where the word Iraq isn't mentioned, and while reading the full report (including footnotes that you don't seem to have done) they say that the evidence they have for such ties are more likely to be untrue then true.

And, this isn't the 1st thread i think you have been trolling in
if you don't like what we are discussing, then leave.
no where did I say that Iraq was mentioned in the summary, its mentioned in the actual 600 pages report itself.
if you are so hateful of bush and america that you want to censor all speech by bush supporters and call them all kinds of names, you sirs, are the troll.

I think its very interesting how people who don't like allowing others to state their views always run around screaming bloody troll this bloody troll that.

definition of trolling: Trolling: Posts that are made with the aim of angering people.

If you get angry cause someone posts a topic that starts a good debate, then you have mental problems.

you need to rethink yours.
you need to go to church and get saved.

if you don't like what we are discussing, then leave.
no where did I say that Iraq was mentioned in the summary, its mentioned in the actual 600 pages report itself.
if you are so hateful of bush and america that you want to censor all speech by bush supporters and call them all kinds of names, you sirs, are the troll.

Seems to me you have a very hard time accepting others views, so don't sit there on a high horse and say that i wanna censor others.

[QUOTE=Whittier-]
definition of trolling: Trolling: Posts that are made with the aim of angering people.
QUOTE]

Ofc there is no room to have another opinion then you have. I mean, what was i thinking? [/sarcasm]

Seems to me you have a very hard time accepting others views, so don't sit there on a high horse and say that i wanna censor others.
nay, that is exactly what you are doing. The point of discussion is not always to convince others. this isn't a courthouse.
and it is you who are sitting on a high horse.
and if I am so incapable of accepting others views, Mr. Everyonewhodisagreeswithmeisatroll, then how is it I have conceded a couple of points to people on this forum.
maybe cause you so caught up in that liberal all probush people are evil attitude.
This thread had calmed down until you and that other fellow showed and started trolling in it.

Whittier-, are you mentally unhinged, why the hell do you want to invade the UK, it wouldn't work. Think about it for a second.

There have been so many stupid comments in this thread, that i don't know whether to laugh or cry, I mean, sure you just go and march out your troops onto the streets of London, from there bases. Now I live near menwath Hill, a American spy base. i have no doubt that if you tried anything like that, see as the fact that theres a army, air and naval base in Harrogate, that you would be beaten.

Sure the American forces would win, but when you think whats happened in iraq after the war 'ended'. How would you control both England and Iraq?

Whittier-, are you mentally unhinged, why the hell do you want to invade the UK, it wouldn't work. Think about it for a second.

There have been so many stupid comments in this thread, that i don't know whether to laugh or cry, I mean, sure you just go and march out your troops onto the streets of London, from there bases. Now I live near menwath Hill, a American spy base. i have no doubt that if you tried anything like that, see as the fact that theres a army, air and naval base in Harrogate, that you would be beaten.

Sure the American forces would win, but when you think whats happened in iraq after the war 'ended'. How would you control both England and Iraq?
you are analyzing sarcasm?
you've had some pretty reasonably good posts, and seeing how you didn't understand the sarcasm of the comment, so I won't rip into you for it.
unlike certain other people

you are analyzing sarcasm?
you've had some pretty reasonably good posts, and seeing how you didn't understand the sarcasm of the comment, so I won't rip into you for it.
unlike certain other people
I took it litrally, i didn't realise it was sarcasum. I thought it was strange from you, your usually more sensable than that.

I took it litrally, i didn't realise it was sarcasum. I thought it was strange from you, your usually more sensable than that.
well, if it offended you, I will apologize.
i've been getting flak left and right from people who didn;t like my views and one who actually threatened me with bodily harm.

saved us from the dictatorial world govt. that kyoto would have imposed on us.

Yeah i forgot reducing pollution is un-american how silly of me.

And no dropping out of kyoto didnt endear you in the eyes of the world either.

Flax

Yeah i forgot reducing pollution is un-american how silly of me.

And no dropping out of kyoto didnt endear you in the eyes of the world either.

Flax
I thought I already answered that one.

Kyoto, as I recall, blames the US for something like 90% of the world's pollution.

just banning industry in america is not going to cure the world's pollution problem.

If you want to see the evilness in its true form you might actually try and read some of it.

The Kyoto Protocol (http://untreaty.un.org/English/notpubl/kyoto-en.htm)

At the bottom there are figures for the countries that shows that the US comitment would been in level with most other countries.

Flax

I thought I already answered that one.

Yeah you had i didnt read the thread to finish before posting.
Made you a propper reply now tho.

Flax

nay, that is exactly what you are doing. The point of discussion is not always to convince others. this isn't a courthouse.
and it is you who are sitting on a high horse.
and if I am so incapable of accepting others views, Mr. Everyonewhodisagreeswithmeisatroll, then how is it I have conceded a couple of points to people on this forum.
maybe cause you so caught up in that liberal all probush people are evil attitude.
This thread had calmed down until you and that other fellow showed and started trolling in it.

Lol, you don't se the point. You don't really upset me, therefor you can't really accuse me for trolling, cause if i am not angry or upset by what you post here, I can't be trolling. That's how YOU see trolling.

If you have read my views I can disagree with alot of people without saying they are trolling.

You are pretty much saying what you say and believe is the ultimate truth and that everyone should think so for some reason. That's what I think. If you say anything like "Go away", "Change your views" or "Shut up" you will contradict yourself. However, I actually suspect that you will say something in line with that to reply this post.

If you want to see the evilness in its true form you might actually try and read some of it.

The Kyoto Protocol (http://untreaty.un.org/English/notpubl/kyoto-en.htm)

At the bottom there are figures for the countries that shows that the US comitment would been in level with most other countries.

Flax
So it is true. China, India, Mexico, looks like the entire third world is exempted.
If that's the case, we should not sign on until they do. And they accept the same committment as everyone else.
Bush is right to reject this as unfair.

Hey, they're terrorists.
So are the Americans.

If that's the case, we should not sign on until they do. And they accept the same committment as everyone else.
Bush is right to reject this as unfair.

Have it ever occurred to you that the idustrial world actually pollute more then mainly agricultural nations ?

And yes if the western world sigend i think it would be much easier to get the others inline.

But why would GWB condone something that would in anyway cut in to the profit margins of his buddies.

I cant reply for a while now as im off to play poker wish me luck :)

flax

Lol, you don't se the point. You don't really upset me, therefor you can't really accuse me for trolling, cause if i am not angry or upset by what you post here, I can't be trolling. That's how YOU see trolling.

If you have read my views I can disagree with alot of people without saying they are trolling.

You are pretty much saying what you say and believe is the ultimate truth and that everyone should think so for some reason. That's what I think. If you say anything like "Go away", "Change your views" or "Shut up" you will contradict yourself. However, I actually suspect that you will say something in line with that to reply this post.
1. You misunderstand. Let me put it another way, and I am certain I posted the definition, trolling is posting something just to solicit an angry response. Thats what you seem to be doing.

2. "You are pretty much saying what you say and believe is the ultimate truth and that everyone should think so for some reason."
and the problem with that is?

3. " If you say anything like "Go away", "Change your views" or "Shut up" you will contradict yourself."
If I did that, I would miss on potentially important information.
It is always this is what I think and why I think. I already stated earlier I wasn't trying to change anybody's views.
I have not told any one to shut up.
Third, the only two times I said something even close to "go away" was when you and that other fellow posted what looked to me like flamming.
And if someone flames me, you better believe I ain't taking it sitting down.
If someone attacks my character, I'll not take it sitting down.
You ask any one who knows me personally, I'll go into that bar or club that other fellow was talking bout earlier. And I'll spout off my views.
If anyone tries to do something cause they don't like, heh, they'll get a few surprises.
Hell, I went up to the governor of California one time and told him straight he was wrong and he was the most unethical governor in california history. course a year later he was recalled.
i don't care who you are or where I'm at. I speak my mind, and I don't care who gets offended.

Have it ever occurred to you that the idustrial world actually pollute more then mainly agricultural nations ?

And yes if the western world sigend i think it would be much easier to get the others inline.

But why would GWB condone something that would in anyway cut in to the profit margins of his buddies.
china, india, mexico, especially china and mexico can hardly be called agricultural nations.

So are the Americans.
americans don't go around torturing and killing defenseless civilians

Umm, yes they do. (although I do not think that the majority of good Americans shoul;d be tarred by the actions of a few).

1. You misunderstand. Let me put it another way, and I am certain I posted the definition, trolling is posting something just to solicit an angry response. Thats what you seem to be doing.

2. "You are pretty much saying what you say and believe is the ultimate truth and that everyone should think so for some reason."
and the problem with that is?



Funny that you can tell better then me wither i am upset/angry or not.

The problem with that is that you want us to respect your points but it doesn't seem to me like you respect everyone elses view. Rather often when someone disagree with you you call them antibush or unchristian as if it's a bad thing to be any of that.

Thing is, if you want people to respect your views, you should not disrespect others. If you don't want people to try shovel thier believes down your thout you shouldn't shovel anything down thiers. Thinks there's something about that that resumes the whole point of christianity, btw.

Umm, yes they do. (although I do not think that the majority of good Americans shoul;d be tarred by the actions of a few).

Nor should the people of the Midle East, Arabs or Muslims. Or any others.

Umm, yes they do. (although I do not think that the majority of good Americans shoul;d be tarred by the actions of a few).
we agree on that Americans shouldn't be tarred by the actions of the few rotten apples in the barrel.

Funny that you can tell better then me wither i am upset/angry or not.

The problem with that is that you want us to respect your points but it doesn't seem to me like you respect everyone elses view. Rather often when someone disagree with you you call them antibush or unchristian as if it's a bad thing to be any of that.

Thing is, if you want people to respect your views, you should not disrespect others. If you don't want people to try shovel thier believes down your thout you shouldn't shovel anything down thiers. Thinks there's something about that that resumes the whole point of christianity, btw.
If you listened to the arguments some of these people were making, they were saying they held those views cause they hated Bush.
Unchristian only if they claim to be christian and support something like abortion or gay marriage which is unchristian.
If you want to support that stuff, but you don't go around claiming to be christian, I won't say that you unchristian.
If they disrespect me, i throwing it back at them.
And just cause I am stating my views does not mean I am cramming them down anyone's throat.

Nor should the people of the Midle East, Arabs or Muslims. Or any others.
Incredible. You actually said something I agree with.

americans don't go around torturing and killing defenseless civilians
On what planet are you living?

On what planet are you living?
so you hate americans?

If you listened to the arguments some of these people were making, they were saying they held those views cause they hated Bush.
Unchristian only if they claim to be christian and support something like abortion or gay marriage which is unchristian.
If you want to support that stuff, but you don't go around claiming to be christian, I won't say that you unchristian.
If they disrespect me, i throwing it back at them.
And just cause I am stating my views does not mean I am cramming them down anyone's throat.

Why, you little ungrateful piece of shit! I am far more American than you will ever be. I was in Vietnam. I fought against the Communists, just so could be a little bastard and state your mind. I have seen what life is like outside of America. You are just like all those other little school boys who can't formulate an opinion except what Daddy tells you. You have absolutely no idea what it means to be American. You have no idea what it means to be patriotic. You have absolutely no idea how hard people work just so you can go on your pathetically supported rants about how anyone who disagrees with you should die. I am utterly amazed. Perplexed. In all my years I have never know anyone so ungrateful. You really need to rethink your life you little bastard.


you need to rethink yours.
you need to go to church and get saved.

If you can get any closer to shoveling then this, i'd be amazed.

And for the bush thing, you have called me antibush and expressed it as if it was one of the greatest sins. Sure, I am against him, cause i din't like him. But I don't hate him.

But then again, you can proly judge that alot better then me. Afterall, you are clearly better then me on knowing if i am upset or not. So why shouldn't you be able to know that I hate bush aswell even if i claim I don't..? Sorry, I must be stupid for just asking such a question...

If you can get any closer to shoveling then this, i'd be amazed.

And for the bush thing, you have called me antibush and expressed it as if it was one of the greatest sins. Sure, I am against him, cause i din't like him. But I don't hate him.

But then again, you can proly judge that alot better then me. Afterall, you are clearly better then me on knowing if i am upset or not. So why shouldn't you be able to know that I hate bush aswell even if i claim I don't..? Sorry, I must be stupid for just asking such a question...
Its called tit for tat.
There was no way in hell I was letting him get with that. I could have flamed him back you know. That's all he was doing was flaming.

To oppose the fight against terrorism just cause you don't like Bush is worse than a sin.

And there you go again. "you seem to know Im upset when i know Im not"
I said no such thing. But since you keep brining it up, I am beginning to think maybe your out of your rocker.

Its called tit for tat.
There was no way in hell I was letting him get with that. I could have flamed him back you know. That's all he was doing was flaming.

To oppose the fight against terrorism just cause you don't like Bush is worse than a sin.

And there you go again. "you seem to know Im upset when i know Im not"
I said no such thing. But since you keep brining it up, I am beginning to think maybe your out of your rocker.

And i call it shoveling...
Btw, by replying like you did, you kina proved his point in my eyes.

And just because you don't like bush or the way he fights terrorism doesn't make you an opposer to the fight against terrorism.

and about the last thing... I am prolly less "out of my rocker" then you.

And i call it shoveling...
Btw, by replying like you did, you kina proved his point in my eyes.

And just because you don't like bush or the way he fights terrorism doesn't make you an opposer to the fight against terrorism.

and about the last thing... I am prolly less "out of my rocker" then you.
your name, La La Land is very fitting of you.

Its called tit for tat.
There was no way in hell I was letting him get with that. I could have flamed him back you know. That's all he was doing was flaming.

To oppose the fight against terrorism just cause you don't like Bush is worse than a sin.

And there you go again. "you seem to know Im upset when i know Im not"
I said no such thing. But since you keep brining it up, I am beginning to think maybe your out of your rocker.
a fight against terrorism is not the same as a fight agaisnt anyone bush doesnt like, which is what we are doing, if it was a fight against terrorism we would be doing it right, removing without killing high members within terrorist organizations and broadcasting propaganda and stop doing stuff to piss off the terrorists even more

your name, La La Land is very fitting of you.

And then this discussion was over. Ended with you not coming up with anything better then a personal insult. That means that it's....


GAME OVER


...for you. Oo

Nor should the people of the Midle East, Arabs or Muslims. Or any others.
True.

And then this discussion was over. Ended with you not coming up with anything better then a personal insult. That means that it's....


GAME OVER


...for you. Oo
you call that a personal insult?

you call that a personal insult?

well, care to explain what you meant with it then?

a fight against terrorism is not the same as a fight agaisnt anyone bush doesnt like, which is what we are doing, if it was a fight against terrorism we would be doing it right, removing without killing high members within terrorist organizations and broadcasting propaganda and stop doing stuff to piss off the terrorists even more
"stop doing stuff to piss of the terrorists even more"
This will sound mean, but that is a coward's way of thinking.
That is precisely how the terrorists want you to think.

well, care to explain what you meant with it then?
I call it a small jab.
A pun if you know what that is.

"stop doing stuff to piss of the terrorists even more"
This will sound mean, but that is a coward's way of thinking.
That is precisely how the terrorists want you to think.
ok, lets keep doing things that are against the regions social standards, THATS HOW YOU CREATE MORE TERRORISTS YOU SIMPLETON: you kill the populace looking for "terrorists" and do things against the societies beliefs.

ok, lets keep doing things that are against the regions social standards, THATS HOW YOU CREATE MORE TERRORISTS YOU SIMPLETON: you kill the populace looking for "terrorists" and do things against the societies beliefs.like what?
don't bomb a mosque even though there are people in there shooting at you?
what are you supposed to do? let them kill your men from the safety of the mosque.
what the heck are we doing that's really against their social standards?

I call it a small jab.
A pun if you know what that is.
Still doesn't answer the question.

like what?
don't bomb a mosque even though there are people in there shooting at you?
what are you supposed to do? let them kill your men from the safety of the mosque.
what the heck are we doing that's really against their social standards?
no dont bomb mosques, BAD IDEA, stay the hell away from them, FAR AWAY. mosques are SACRED, if they keep using it as armories they will eventually anger people because the yare holy places, but if WE shoot them they are going to eb automatically pissed at us

lets see what we are doing? threatening the prisoenrs with dogs, stirpping prisoners, treating women same as men, bombing mosques and residential neighborhoods

Still doesn't answer the question.
what?
you still don't understand.
I would think that some like you whose views are so superior to everyone elses, and who can never be wrong would have been able to figure it out.

Let me make it easy so even a 7 year old could understand:

Pun=off hand joke

I would have thought you'd be able to figure that out.
now you got me laughing,

like what?
don't bomb a mosque even though there are people in there shooting at you?
what are you supposed to do? let them kill your men from the safety of the mosque.
what the heck are we doing that's really against their social standards?

Maybe you should do like your religion tell you to do, turn the other chin. That would mean walking away from it. Result, you are no longer under fire.

no dont bomb mosques, BAD IDEA, stay the hell away from them, FAR AWAY. mosques are SACRED, if they keep using it as armories they will eventually anger people because the yare holy places, but if WE shoot them they are going to eb automatically pissed at us

lets see what we are doing? threatening the prisoenrs with dogs, stirpping prisoners, treating women same as men, bombing mosques and residential neighborhoods
only a very small group of people was involved in the torture. You can't apply that all americans or even all american soldiers.

mosques are safe zones that cannot be attacked unless there are people inside shooting at you. That's in the Geneva convention, every soldier is taught that annually.
what the heck makes you think the unarmed locals are going to move against heavily armed terrorists?
and no we don't go around targeting residential nieghborhoods.

Maybe you should do like your religion tell you to do, turn the other chin. That would mean walking away from it. Result, you are no longer under fire.


I think that "giving up" is not what Christianity is about. Only the extreme liberals who hate Christianity try to preach that so they can make the right look bad for not bending over like the left does when there is any serious threat of danger.


Luke 22:36

what?
you still don't understand.
I would think that some like you whose views are so superior to everyone elses, and who can never be wrong would have been able to figure it out.

Let me make it easy so even a 7 year old could understand:

Pun=off hand joke

I would have thought you'd be able to figure that out.
now you got me laughing,

lol.

First you describe me as I'd described you, like it or not.

And for the making it easy part, I very well understand what "pun" means. The question was about what you meant with that sentence if it wasn't an insult. It was pretty obvious it was a taunt, a sort of taunt that would be used when there all of a sudden is a lack of arguments if you ask me.

Maybe you should do like your religion tell you to do, turn the other chin. That would mean walking away from it. Result, you are no longer under fire.
Let's see. According to the 911 report, Bin Laden attacked us in Somalia.
We left Somalia. Bin Laden told some news organization that he was upset we left cause he wanted to butcher more americans.
So what does he do? He attacks the embassies in africa, he attacks the USS Cole, and he comes over here and crashes three planes into to two national monuments.
You can't walk away. Cause if you do, they will follow you. What do you propose then? Just keep running?
There is a point when you have to stand up straight and tall and confront evil head on.
As long you keep walking away, you are always going to be under their fire.

only a very small group of people was involved in the torture. You can't apply that all americans or even all american soldiers.
it was alot more widespread than you damned think, AND THAT DOESNT MATTER

mosques are safe zones that cannot be attacked unless there are people inside shooting at you. That's in the Geneva convention, every soldier is taught that annually.
THEY SHOULDNT BE ATTACKED ANYWAY
if this nation was invaded, and peopel are holding up defense in your church, do you want the invading force mortaring and bombing your church?


what the heck makes you think the unarmed locals are going to move against heavily armed terrorists?
and no we don't go around targeting residential nieghborhoods.

they arnt going to "move" against them, you are completely ignorant of the social structure over there. the the high ayatollas wil become VERY displeased with the peopel turning mosques into fighting areas and will turn the public against them, they will have to withdraw or face the wrath of their peers. you have NO udnerstanding of the discussion, stop trying to argue

AND NOT EVERY DAMEND ONE WHO OPPOSES US IS A TERRORIST YOU HALF WIT

I think that "giving up" is not what Christianity is about. Only the extreme liberals who hate Christianity try to preach that so they can make the right look bad for not bending over like the left does when there is any serious threat of danger.


Luke 22:36

It's not about giving up. It's about being the better man and don't hit back.

I think that "giving up" is not what Christianity is about. Only the extreme liberals who hate Christianity try to preach that so they can make the right look bad for not bending over like the left does when there is any serious threat of danger.


Luke 22:36
Amen

lol.

First you describe me as I'd described you, like it or not.

And for the making it easy part, I very well understand what "pun" means. The question was about what you meant with that sentence if it wasn't an insult. It was pretty obvious it was a taunt, a sort of taunt that would be used when there all of a sudden is a lack of arguments if you ask me.
you can believe that if you want to. I'm all for religious freedom, people have the right to believe what ever they want.
It doesn't mean its right though.

It's not about giving up. It's about being the better man and don't hit back.
yeah, didn't you know, your supposed to let them kill you.

Let's see. According to the 911 report, Bin Laden attacked us in Somalia.
We left Somalia. Bin Laden told some news organization that he was upset we left cause he wanted to butcher more americans.
So what does he do? He attacks the embassies in africa, he attacks the USS Cole, and he comes over here and crashes three planes into to two national monuments.
You can't walk away. Cause if you do, they will follow you. What do you propose then? Just keep running?
There is a point when you have to stand up straight and tall and confront evil head on.
As long you keep walking away, you are always going to be under their fire.

Retreating from a mosqe and redrawing forces from a whole nation is not the exact samre thing tho.

I agree with you that sometimes you have to stand your ground and fight back. But fighting back at every given opertunity is not the best thing.

it was alot more widespread than you damned think, AND THAT DOESNT MATTER


THEY SHOULDNT BE ATTACKED ANYWAY
if this nation was invaded, and peopel are holding up defense in your church, do you want the invading force mortaring and bombing your church?




they arnt going to "move" against them, you are completely ignorant of the social structure over there. the the high ayatollas wil become VERY displeased with the peopel turning mosques into fighting areas and will turn the public against them, they will have to withdraw or face the wrath of their peers. you have NO udnerstanding of the discussion, stop trying to argue

AND NOT EVERY DAMEND ONE WHO OPPOSES US IS A TERRORIST YOU HALF WIT

1. it does matter

2. if there were terrorists using my church to kill people, I would have no reservations about them bombing the church.

3. the ayatollas you speak of, havn't said a darn thing about going after the terrorists.

Retreating from a mosqe and redrawing forces from a whole nation is not the exact samre thing tho.

I agree with you that sometimes you have to stand your ground and fight back. But fighting back at every given opertunity is not the best thing.
and a waste of resources.

you can believe that if you want to. I'm all for religious freedom, people have the right to believe what ever they want.
It doesn't mean its right though.

And yet, the question still stands. Are we a lill scared of it? <-- now that's a taunt/jab/pun/whatever.

yeah, didn't you know, your supposed to let them kill you.

Yupp, that's obviously what I meant.

And we need to move our troops out of our british military bases into the streets of London and just plain take over. Teach the british a lesson they won't ever forget.

I say let the Americans come, for we will drown them in a sea of burberry scarves! We have some of the best street fighters in the worlds, battle hardened from the streets of our European neighbours. What do we call these troops? We call them football hooligans!

((The above statement was a 'joke'for anyone who notices the riots that seem to follow our football teams about from time to time.))

And we need to move our troops out of our british military bases into the streets of London and just plain take over. Teach the british a lesson they won't ever forget.

1) British - adjective of proper noun "Britain", needs a capital.
2) Oh, so you're attacking Britain now? AMERICA - IT COULD BE YOU NEXT! A minor disagreement, something annoys you and suddenly "Send in the Marines!" What do you propose for France? Nukes?

Jeez, some people. Peace and love. You can't invade my home country becuase you feel like it.
3) You go, Badgernam! Those hooligans would drive out...the other hooligans any day!

1. it does matter

2. if there were terrorists using my church to kill people, I would have no reservations about them bombing the church.

3. the ayatollas you speak of, havn't said a darn thing about going after the terrorists.

2) i did NOT say terrorists, i said people occupying the church fighting against the force that has invaded america, i pity you if you have adopted the same definition of terrorist as the current incompetent administration

I say let the Americans come, for we will drown them in a sea of burberry scarves! We have some of the best street fighters in the worlds, battle hardened from the streets of our European neighbours. What do we call these troops? We call them football hooligans!

((The above statement was a 'joke'for anyone who notices the riots that seem to follow our football teams about from time to time.))
that was a joke i thought it was a quote from the iraqi information minister, baghdad bob

china, india, mexico, especially china and mexico can hardly be called agricultural nations.

1.India
agriculture 60%, services 23%, industry 17% (1999)

2.china
agriculture 50%, industry 22%, services 28% (2001 est.)

So a counttry with 60% of the workforce working as farmer and 17% in the industry shouldnt be called agricultural ?

What then 90% farmers or what ?

so you hate americans?
Of course. Any reason why I shouldn't? Who doesn't?

Of course. Any reason why I shouldn't? Who doesn't?
I think you just say that to piss people off.

If you really want to see a pro terrorism video, Fahrenheit 911 comes out on DVD in about 2 months.

If you really want to see a pro terrorism video, Fahrenheit 911 comes out on DVD in about 2 months.


<cough cough>

**looks around and notices the lack of laughter**


Oh wait, were you trying to be an ignorant little asswipe? Sorry, but that's just how it came across.



You're a shit, but you should still be happy, so smile! :)

Stop following me around kid, you're embarassing yourself.

Stop following me around kid, you're embarassing yourself.

Au contrair my foolish little friend. You're making the idiot out of yourself.

If you really want to see a pro terrorism video, Fahrenheit 911 comes out on DVD in about 2 months.
I have seen that one, that doesn't come close being as pro terrorist as this one does.
I'm a republican and a strong supporter of bush, I found Fahrenhiet 911 to be good spoof, except for the part and where he bashed the american military.

F911 is a great spoof, until you realize every other point is either an out of context quote or an outright lie.

Presenting anti-American lies as truth is great recruiting material for terrorists. In fact, Hamas is a major distributor of F911 in parts of the middle east.

Michael Moore should be tried for treason, and then rendered into heating oil in time for winter.

F911 is a great spoof, until you realize every other point is either an out of context quote or an outright lie.

Presenting anti-American lies as truth is great recruiting material for terrorists. In fact, Hamas is a major distributor of F911 in parts of the middle east.

Michael Moore should be tried for treason, and then rendered into heating oil in time for winter.


Don't you find it slightly ironic that the freedom of speech you hate him having so much is what lets you say this in the first place?


Oh, and your a shit. But don't let it bring you down, smile! :)

F911 is a great spoof, until you realize every other point is either an out of context quote or an outright lie.

Presenting anti-American lies as truth is great recruiting material for terrorists. In fact, Hamas is a major distributor of F911 in parts of the middle east.

Michael Moore should be tried for treason, and then rendered into heating oil in time for winter.
Are you claiming that Moore would have the gall, to distribute his video to the middle east to help Hamas, before it even appeared on the big screens here.
Cause that what was people were claiming a couple weeks before it was in the theaters.
And I didn't really find anything in their that out and out anti jewish.
Most spoofs do take things out of context. That's why its called a spoof, cause its done in a funny way.

Michael Moore should be tried for treason, and then rendered into heating oil in time for winter.

Such trail would prolly be funny, cause then a court of law would say what things in the movies are true, what's not true and so on. Would stop people to blindly believe everything in it or blindly think everything is a lie.

I don't know, but there are about 4 of you here that really need to calm down. the ones I can name off the top of my head, are whitty there and the ty dude, and goed too. I can't remember the last one... *sigh*

Either way, While that second video was a blatant tape of Anti-Americanism, There isn't much that can be done about it. Yeah it is anti american, but being american or allies of america, we still don't have the right to snatch people up for such things. Especially from other nations. It is expressing angst, the people are angry because we are imposing ourselves on their nation... I know I'd be mad if there were tanks rolling around in my back yard.
(not to mention, that's a really crappy video, with a twice stolen beat and crappy lyrics... oh well.)

As for when Ty earlier spoke about stopping mosque, as they are breeding grounds terrorist cells (reworded it) Thats just cruel. In the same logic we should shut down all christian churches as we search for the holy knights of the klu klux klan. And yes it's a good comparison cause the KKK is also a terrorist group out to hurt americans, and being based in their religion we know they must recruit people out of churches right?

Go death and descruction! :mp5: :sniper:

I don't know, but there are about 4 of you here that really need to calm down. the ones I can name off the top of my head, are whitty there and the ty dude, and goed too. I can't remember the last one... *sigh*

Either way, While that second video was a blatant tape of Anti-Americanism, There isn't much that can be done about it. Yeah it is anti american, but being american or allies of america, we still don't have the right to snatch people up for such things. Especially from other nations. It is expressing angst, the people are angry because we are imposing ourselves on their nation... I know I'd be mad if there were tanks rolling around in my back yard.
(not to mention, that's a really crappy video, with a twice stolen beat and crappy lyrics... oh well.)

As for when Ty earlier spoke about stopping mosque, as they are breeding grounds terrorist cells (reworded it) Thats just cruel. In the same logic we should shut down all christian churches as we search for the holy knights of the klu klux klan. And yes it's a good comparison cause the KKK is also a terrorist group out to hurt americans, and being based in their religion we know they must recruit people out of churches right?

Go death and descruction! :mp5: :sniper:


Errmmm....when did I say anything about "stopping mosques"?

All I said was the "rap video" had no place because it incited people to violence. In fact, you will find I actually stated I would not go as far as to say all mosques were breeding grounds for terrorism but playing of such videos had no place is religious buildings such as mosques.

I'm just curious, but why are some of the people here so die hard supportive of Bush. I mean, the guy is president non-elect for starters. He's basically washed out every business he's been involved in including the US economy right now. He went awol or some such thing from the air national-guard. He's an idiot to boot who hasn't said or done anything intelligent his entire term that I've seen.
He blew us Afghanistan, not that you could tell other then a little more air traffic.
He invaded Iraq on a false premis and then changed the hunt for WMD's to the liberation front which has been a disaster left, right, and center as its much more difficult to occupy a country that doesn't really want you there when you could blow it up.
He's pushed away most American allies to arms length at best other then the brits, and basically set civil rights back 100 years in a country that is supposed to be the world benchmark for freedom and liberty.
In fact, I can't think of anything truely good he has done.

Don't get me wrong, I don't support the terrorists one bit, I think they're scum and that video is goofy gangsta trash by some guy in an evil clown suit.
But honestly, the only thing setting GWB and shit like Osama and Sadam apart is that GWB hasn't killed his own people on purpose and has a multi-trillion dollar military to back him up. I don't see him as a big defender of democracy and freedom at all.
So please, tell me what it is about George that you like so much to be a die hard supporter of him. And please don't just say cause he's republican, thats supporting a party, not a candidate.
This could affect the way I vote.