NationStates Jolt Archive

The length you guys will go to support a pro-American cause.

Lets see, Indonisa you supported a repressive regime, Chile you supported a repressive, murderious regime. I was udner the impression that Vietnam never invaded Cambodia and Loas, but the US didn. To stop the Ho Chi Minh road I balive. And yous et up a puppet capitalist regime that proceeded to massicar the buddests (Diems goverment) then supported a serise of millitary coups. You do realise that ho Chi Minh was the elected presedent of south Vietnam. But hey, elections arn't actually valid if the person the US wants in dosn't get elected, are they?
Ho Chi Minh was not elected in South Vietnam. He was North Vietnam. He invaded South Vietnam in violation of international law.

1. You keep leaving out that when we found out what actually happened, the US condemned the coup and demanded the return of the elected leadership. You always leave out that the US threatened the coup with certain actions unless they restored Chavez. The same US that Chavez claims is trying to kill him. He was restored two days later after US diplomatic efforts. If not for that, there would have been a civil war.
If not for the US the coup would still be running Venezuela.

Aha. Now I've got you. You say Chavez is a bloodthirsty dicator. You say the US supported Chavez. Therefore, the US supported a bloodthirsty dictator.

So out of his 10,000 readers, none of them commented on it?
I don't allow comments.

Ho Chi Minh was not elected in South Vietnam. He was North Vietnam. He invaded South Vietnam in violation of international law.

Just like we invaded Iraq in violation of international law!

Whittier.

I find you to be extremely amusing. You denegrate others for being Anti-American/Anti-Democracy or whatever, but you, on the other hand, are soooo Pro-Bush/Pro-America that you are blinded by to the truth.

Successive US Governments have been extremely hypocritical in their activities, not only recently but much further back. Lets take for example, Afghanistan. In Afghanistan the US government supplied Osama Bin Laden and The Taliban with weapons and training, then what did they do, they went and took out an 'oppressive and evil government' that they had helped create in the first place. Hell the same is true in Iraq, with Saddam Hussein, the US government of the day helped him setup his government and then, when he no longer suited their plans, invasion time!!!!!

So perhaps, Whittier, you look in your own closet before you go hoking other peoples!!!!:upyours: :headbang: :upyours: :headbang: :upyours: :mp5: :mp5: :mp5:

You always leave out that the US threatened the coup with certain actions unless they restored Chavez. The same US that Chavez claims is trying to kill him. He was restored two days later after US diplomatic efforts. If not for that, there would have been a civil war.
If not for the US the coup would still be running Venezuela.

That's so ridiculous, I'm laughing now ! :)

US never said anything against the coup until AFTER Chavez was back in power. And Chavez was back in power because the Venezuelian people, more than two millions of them, took the street and, while the Metropolitan Police (under the control of Chavez opponents) opened fired on them (the first time the police fired on demonstrators since Chavez was elected), marched to Miraflores. And once the streets around Miraflores were completly stormed by millions of Venezuelian, the palace guard, who remained loyal to Chavez, took back the control of the palace.

Aha. Now I've got you. You say Chavez is a bloodthirsty dicator. You say the US supported Chavez. Therefore, the US supported a bloodthirsty dictator.
Dam it.

You got me there. Well, hopefully when the next President is elected, he will end covert US support for Chavez.

In the United States, political conventions are all funded by private funding. They don't get any public funds whatsoever. That is why they can kick people out of their convention. If the public gave any funding to the convention, then they would not have as much freedom to do so. If the private party wants them out, they, by law, have to leave or they are tresspassing on private property.
It's a far cry from what's going on in Venezuela, which looks to me like nothing more than your daily soapopera. I am more interested in his actions outside Venezuela than inside Venezuela. Remember that Al Qaeda and the Taliban were feeding the poor and what not also. But at the same time they allied themselves with Israel and attacked the US repeatedly.
What he does in his country is his business, but once he steps outside of Venezuela, it becomes other countries business.

You're more interested in the mans actionsoutside of venezuela, yet you denounce him for having "unfair elections"

In Afghanistan the US government supplied Osama Bin Laden and The Taliban with weapons and training...

Not quite: the Taliban didn't come into existence as a unified whole until after the funding was stopped. Certainly the US trained and equipped those that went on to form the Taliban, I'll give you that.

Just like we invaded Iraq in violation of international law!
maybe. But that was due to Saddam's past record. Saddam brought it on himself.

I don't allow comments.

How nice for a "free speach" supporter.

maybe. But that was due to Saddam's past record. Saddam brought it on himself.
so, in effect, "it's okay when WE do it. You can't"

Hippocrit.

Ho Chi Minh was not elected in South Vietnam. He was North Vietnam. He invaded South Vietnam in violation of international law.
Read your history. In 196-somthing (Can't reamber the date) there was an election in south vietnam udner the US mandate to reunify the coutnrys. Ho Chi Minh won by a massive majority against Diem. As he prepared to move south the US declared the election invalid-and helped Diem keep his place. The Vietcong (At that time not truely supported by the North Vietnamise) started up to get there elected leader into power.

The Tompkin incident happened, the Su bombed North Vietnam and o Chi Minh THEN helped the Vietcong.

maybe.

Following the first Gulf War it was stated by Western leaders that they did not remove him from power because they did not have a legal mandate, yet later, on the basis of the same resolution they claimed they did have a legal right to do so. A tad fishy.

But that was due to Saddam's past record. Saddam brought it on himself.

So all the stuff about WMDs was just a lie to placate western opposition?

maybe. But that was due to Saddam's past record. Saddam brought it on himself.

How did he do that?? By refusing to decommission WMDs he never even had. In that case he did, I mean how dare he not WMD when we told him to decommission them!!!!!!

Whittier.

I find you to be extremely amusing. You denegrate others for being Anti-American/Anti-Democracy or whatever, but you, on the other hand, are soooo Pro-Bush/Pro-America that you are blinded by to the truth.

Successive US Governments have been extremely hypocritical in their activities, not only recently but much further back. Lets take for example, Afghanistan. In Afghanistan the US government supplied Osama Bin Laden and The Taliban with weapons and training, then what did they do, they went and took out an 'oppressive and evil government' that they had helped create in the first place. Hell the same is true in Iraq, with Saddam Hussein, the US government of the day helped him setup his government and then, when he no longer suited their plans, invasion time!!!!!

So perhaps, Whittier, you look in your own closet before you go hoking other peoples!!!!:upyours: :headbang: :upyours: :headbang: :upyours: :mp5: :mp5: :mp5:
blatant lies

We did not set up the Taliban. Our involvement in Afghanistan was limited to providing the Afghan freedom fighters the means to oppose commie aggression from Russia. After that, we left them to settle their own internal affairs.

Nor did we install Saddam. He came to power in a very bloody coup that the US had no part in. GET YOUR FACTS STRAIGHT.

blatant lies

We did not set up the Taliban. Our involvement in Afghanistan was limited to providing the Afghan freedom fighters the means to oppose commie aggression from Russia. After that, we left them to settle their own internal affairs.

Nor did we install Saddam. He came to power in a very bloody coup that the US had no part in. GET YOUR FACTS STRAIGHT.
I tjust so happens that the Taliban formed from the insurgents the SU equipped supplied and trained. Thats just like saying that the Bay of Pigs invasion had nothing to do with the US. "We equipped, trained and ordered them guvnor, but we wern't there."

blatant lies

We did not set up the Taliban. Our involvement in Afghanistan was limited to providing the Afghan freedom fighters the means to oppose commie aggression from Russia. After that, we left them to settle their own internal affairs.

Nor did we install Saddam. He came to power in a very bloody coup that the US had no part in. GET YOUR FACTS STRAIGHT.

Yeah 'cept the US did help set them up, mebbe not exactly the Taliban per se but certainly the core structure of that organisation. And aint it just like the US to go in all bull headed and wreck a country and then leave to a virtually bankrupt population to rebuild a country all by themselves while the US sits bac kand reaps the rewards some 20yrs later when those same people crash Airplanes into the WTC and Pentagon.

I tjust so happens that the Taliban formed from the insurgents the SU equipped supplied and trained. Thats just like saying that the Bay of Pigs invasion had nothing to do with the US. "We equipped, trained and ordered them guvnor, but we wern't there."
you again leave out the FACT that we also funded and supported Castro before he turned oppressive.

Nor did we install Saddam. He came to power in a very bloody coup that the US had no part in. GET YOUR FACTS STRAIGHT.

No, technically he came to power peacefully, and then was responsible for the deaths of a couple of dozen people immediately afterwards in order to secure his position. Hardly a 'very bloody coup' by the standard of coups as a whole.

I tjust so happens that the Taliban formed from the insurgents the SU equipped supplied and trained. Thats just like saying that the Bay of Pigs invasion had nothing to do with the US. "We equipped, trained and ordered them guvnor, but we wern't there."

The Taliban formed from one group of the muhajideen supported by the US in the 1980s. Other mujahideen were muslims from other countries who followed the call of jihad to resist the Soviets in Afghanistan and then went back to their respective countries after the war was over. And other Afghan mujahideen went back to their feudal/tribal/warlord lifestyle after the war. There wasn't any direct link from mujahideen resistance- to - Taliban rule. It was more like, mujahideen resistance - to - warlord state - to - civil war - to - taliban.

If anything Saddam actually did justified an invasion by US forces, why hasn't the US invaded any of the other countries that they claim are just as bad? Oh wait, I know. There's little strategic benefit to actually owning a chunk of land in the other places like North Korea, Sudan, etc, etc.
1. We can't go after everyone so we only go after the most serious offenders.

2. If it was you, you would just say fuck it, let them invade their neighbors and threaten the world with nuclear weapons.

blatant lies

We did not set up the Taliban. Our involvement in Afghanistan was limited to providing the Afghan freedom fighters the means to oppose commie aggression from Russia. After that, we left them to settle their own internal affairs.

Nor did we install Saddam. He came to power in a very bloody coup that the US had no part in. GET YOUR FACTS STRAIGHT.

First of all, remember that Osama was one of those "afghani freedom fighters". And yes, people who rebel against the authoritarian Soviets, only to set up their own Authoritarian state, are what i'd call "Freedom Fighters". Admit it, we didnt give a hsit about what they did with Afghanistan, we only gave a shit that it wasnt under Soviet rule.

Sure, we didn't install Saddam directly. We didn't install Pinochet directly either. What we DID do, however, was give them the weapons and training necessary to perform the coup in both cases.

Sure, we didn't install Saddam directly. We didn't install Pinochet directly either. What we DID do, however, was give them the weapons and training necessary to perform the coup in both cases.

It is questionable whether you can describe the act of Saddam becoming head of state of Iraq a coup or not.

It is questionable whether you can describe the act of Saddam becoming head of state of Iraq a coup or not.

Well, it might not have been a coup, but we did give him the weapons his military police used to torture people under his brutal Authortiarian regime.

1. We can't go after everyone so we only go after the most serious offenders.

2. If it was you, you would just say fuck it, let them invade their neighbors and threaten the world with nuclear weapons.
1 How about North-Korea? Way worse and have actually got nukes

2 Iraq didn't have nukes. And I believe you are thinking of your own country right now.

Yeah 'cept the US did help set them up, mebbe not exactly the Taliban per se but certainly the core structure of that organisation. And aint it just like the US to go in all bull headed and wreck a country and then leave to a virtually bankrupt population to rebuild a country all by themselves while the US sits bac kand reaps the rewards some 20yrs later when those same people crash Airplanes into the WTC and Pentagon.
except that is again a fat lie.

There was no core structure. The afghan freedom fighters was nothing more than a loose coalition of groups fighting Russian aggression. That is only reason and the only area we gave them support in. Opposing the commie regime that Russia was trying to force on them.
When Russia left, we left too. We told the Afghans they had to build their own government but that we would help them. Then the Taliban seized power by killing thousands of innocents, so we cut the funding.

We did not set up the Taliban. Let's not forget that most of the weapons that Al Qaeda and the Taliban used to seize power in Afghanistan, were not American weapons but Russian weapons left behind by Russia.

The only American weapons they had were the stinger anti-aircraft missiles.

1. We can't go after everyone so we only go after the most serious offenders.

Bullshit. The leadership behind NK has been responsible for killing more people via executions and starvation than Saddam and those under him ever did. The cases of genocide are quite clearly documented in Darfur, something that doesn't exist in the case of Saddam.


2. If it was you, you would just say fuck it, let them invade their neighbors and threaten the world with nuclear weapons.

You mean like how the US is doing? Invading other nations and threatening them with nuclear weapons?

Now I remember why I stopped bothering to argue with you Whittier. You're nothing more than a lack-witted puppet who doesn't have the brainpower or maturity to look at the failings of your country because you replaced mental prowess with patriotism.

All you can do is spout the same old tired trash because you couldn't be bothered to or are too scared to look at things and exercise some grey matter. The likes of you are all too similar to the likes of Ann Coulter.

Well, it might not have been a coup, but we did give him the weapons his military police used to torture people under his brutal Authortiarian regime.

After the fact, unless I'm very much mistaken: certainly US backing helped him act brutally in order to guard his position.

I find it a bit worrying that posters here are so inclined to accept W--- claim about the rise to power of Saddam without actually checking the facts for themselves.

some 20yrs later when those same people crash Airplanes into the WTC and Pentagon.

Also don't forget the role played by the Saudi in this attack, and the constant support of USA to the Saudi dictatorship.

After the fact, unless I'm very much mistaken: certainly US backing helped him act brutally in order to guard his position.

I find it a bit worrying that posters here are so inclined to accept W--- claim about the rise to power of Saddam without actually checking the facts for themselves.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saddam#Consolidation_of_power

I went to Wikipedia, and the way that he came to power certainly does not sound like a coup. Sounds sort of what like Hitler did.

except that is again a fat lie.

There was no core structure. The afghan freedom fighters was nothing more than a loose coalition of groups fighting Russian aggression. That is only reason and the only area we gave them support in. Opposing the commie regime that Russia was trying to force on them.
When Russia left, we left too. We told the Afghans they had to build their own government but that we would help them. Then the Taliban seized power by killing thousands of innocents, so we cut the funding.

We did not set up the Taliban. Let's not forget that most of the weapons that Al Qaeda and the Taliban used to seize power in Afghanistan, were not American weapons but Russian weapons left behind by Russia.

The only American weapons they had were the stinger anti-aircraft missiles.


Perhaps, but my core point still stands. The US sees a government it doesn't like, it funds or helps or trains insurgents/Freedom Fighters to overthrow said regime. When new regime gets to a certain point the US decides they don't like this new regime it all starts all over again. I mean, I'll bet anyone here that the US will be invading Iraq again in like 20 years because the regime they have helped put in place now will be oppressive and 'evil' government!

First of all, remember that Osama was one of those "afghani freedom fighters". And yes, people who rebel against the authoritarian Soviets, only to set up their own Authoritarian state, are what i'd call "Freedom Fighters". Admit it, we didnt give a hsit about what they did with Afghanistan, we only gave a shit that it wasnt under Soviet rule.

Sure, we didn't install Saddam directly. We didn't install Pinochet directly either. What we DID do, however, was give them the weapons and training necessary to perform the coup in both cases.
We did not give Saddam the weapons and training he needed to seize power.

Pinochet, I don't know. Unless he was a graduate of the SOA.

But I know for a fact we had no role in Saddam's rise to power.

We did not give Saddam the weapons and training he needed to seize power.

Correct, because he did not seize power.

Well, it might not have been a coup, but we did give him the weapons his military police used to torture people under his brutal Authortiarian regime.
AFTER he had already been power for a couple of decades. He gained power in the 60's. He invaded Iran in 1980. It was only after 1980 that we actually started supporting him. Before that, he was supported by the Russians because of his hatred for Israel.

1 How about North-Korea? Way worse and have actually got nukes

2 Iraq didn't have nukes. And I believe you are thinking of your own country right now.
North Korea would also use those nukes. The most we can do, without risking nuclear war, is isolate them.

Iran doesn't have nukes yet and so we can take action to ensure that never happens.

Perhaps, but my core point still stands. The US sees a government it doesn't like, it funds or helps or trains insurgents/Freedom Fighters to overthrow said regime. When new regime gets to a certain point the US decides they don't like this new regime it all starts all over again. I mean, I'll bet anyone here that the US will be invading Iraq again in like 20 years because the regime they have helped put in place now will be oppressive and 'evil' government!
If that is true, then why haven't we done so in Europe? Because it's a false assumption.

Bullshit. The leadership behind NK has been responsible for killing more people via executions and starvation than Saddam and those under him ever did. The cases of genocide are quite clearly documented in Darfur, something that doesn't exist in the case of Saddam.



You mean like how the US is doing? Invading other nations and threatening them with nuclear weapons?

Now I remember why I stopped bothering to argue with you Whittier. You're nothing more than a lack-witted puppet who doesn't have the brainpower or maturity to look at the failings of your country because you replaced mental prowess with patriotism.

All you can do is spout the same old tired trash because you couldn't be bothered to or are too scared to look at things and exercise some grey matter. The likes of you are all too similar to the likes of Ann Coulter.

Before anyone starts feeling the love for Saddam...


how many thousands (tens? hundreds?) of Kurds and Shi'a did he kill, torture and/or kidnap?

It's like there are forces at work who will do anything to discredit the US (not you, i'm just venting), even going so far as trying to paint Saddam as a saint.

The current US administration was linked to the 2002 coup that attemoted to depose Chavez:

http://observer.guardian.co.uk/international/story/0,6903,688071,00.html

The visits by Venezuelans plotting a coup, including Carmona himself, began, say sources, 'several months ago', and continued until weeks before the putsch last weekend. The visitors were received at the White House by the man President George Bush tasked to be his key policy-maker for Latin America, Otto Reich.

If that is true, then why haven't we done so in Europe? Because it's a false assumption.

Because you couldn't get away with it in Europe. The US Government isn't stupid, just morally bankrupt.

There was no core structure. The afghan freedom fighters was nothing more than a loose coalition of groups fighting Russian aggression. That is only reason and the only area we gave them support in. Opposing the commie regime that Russia was trying to force on them.
When Russia left, we left too. We told the Afghans they had to build their own government but that we would help them. Then the Taliban seized power by killing thousands of innocents, so we cut the funding.

We did not set up the Taliban. Let's not forget that most of the weapons that Al Qaeda and the Taliban used to seize power in Afghanistan, were not American weapons but Russian weapons left behind by Russia.

The only American weapons they had were the stinger anti-aircraft missiles.

Not true. That's an astonishingly common misconception regarding the Afghanistan War.

The USSR was actually asked to help out the Afghan Government, by that government, because order needed to be restored. So in they came, and they were attacked by a fair few of the warloads. The USSR didn't, at any point, want to take over the country. That'd be like saying that the USA wanted to take over South Vietnam - it's just not true.

The USA saw the USSR presence and the resistance as a way to get back at the USSR for what happened in Vietnam, so they brought the Muha'jadeen across to the USA to train with your special forces people, who tought them how to fight the USSR off, and showed them how to customise RPGs to make them fire upwards from lying down, by venting the gases out in a non-standard way, for one thing.

The USA then funded the Muha'jadeen and gave them loads of weapons - most notably Stingers to shoot down the Russian Mi-24 Hind helicopters.

The only reason that the Taliban were armed with Russian weapons when they took over the country was because they worked better in the desert, and due to the Russians having horrendous losses, weapons and ammunition were very easy to find for them.

Before anyone starts feeling the love for Saddam...


how many thousands (tens? hundreds?) of Kurds and Shi'a did he kill, torture and/or kidnap?

It's like there are forces at work who will do anything to discredit the US (not you, i'm just venting), even going so far as trying to paint Saddam as a saint.


That's intelligent. Just change the subject or start taking the discussion off in a direction in which it wasn't even heading.

I said no such thing. In fact, I am waiting for several translations from people who not overtly anti-american communists who support international terrorism.

I should get something by Saturday.
Or learn Spanish yourself so you can stop sounding like such a fool. Niño pesado.

Could be this. (http://robertsworldview.blogspot.com/2005_05_01_robertsworldview_archive.html)
Wow...with 10,000 readers...there are a shocking lack of comments....
God, Whittier...you are so completely full of it.

Edit:Just for you, I left a commment.

Before anyone starts feeling the love for Saddam...


how many thousands (tens? hundreds?) of Kurds and Shi'a did he kill, torture and/or kidnap?

It's like there are forces at work who will do anything to discredit the US (not you, i'm just venting), even going so far as trying to paint Saddam as a saint.

I don't really want to start bashing America, but I can't really help it when something this stupid comes along.

Saddam was put in power by the USA to continue the Iran-Iraq war, simply because the USA was making too much money out of it to want it to stop, and the then-current leader of Iraq was about to call a ceasefire.

And actually, the US troops in the north have also killed thousands of Kurds, because they're having the same problem that Saddam had, in that they are attacking the towns, villages and military bases in the nearby areas to where they're living. They just use the blanket term of "insurgents" on them, so that nobody talks about it.

And how many Shi'a are there left in Falluja after you chemical-weaponed it to the ground and killed everyone there?

Screw that question, how many people are there left in Falluja at all?

Or learn Spanish yourself so you can stop sounding like such a fool. Niño pesado.

Got a link to that thread where we were discussing this speech before and all ended up typing like William Shatner? I can't seem to find it.

You're more interested in the mans actionsoutside of venezuela, yet you denounce him for having "unfair elections"
I swear when I first read that, it said, "unfair erections"!

And actually, the US troops in the north have also killed thousands of Kurds, because they're having the same problem that Saddam had, in that they are attacking the towns, villages and military bases in the nearby areas to where they're living. They just use the blanket term of "insurgents" on them, so that nobody talks about it.

And how many Shi'a are there left in Falluja after you chemical-weaponed it to the ground and killed everyone there?

Screw that question, how many people are there left in Falluja at all?

American soldiershave not killed many Kurds. There are very few Allied soldiers in the Kurd-dominated provinces of Iraq at all, because the Kurds have been incredibly co-operative.

There was never a substantial Shia population in Fallujah. Fallujah is a Sunni Arab city in the Sunni triangle - where the brunt of the insurgency is concentrated and where the majority of American soldiers are stationed.

The insurgency is and always was Sunni Arab - dominated (20% of Iraq's population).

I don't allow comments.

How nice for a "free speach" supporter.
Funny...I got to leave a comment, no problem!

Wow...with 10,000 readers...there are a shocking lack of comments....
God, Whittier...you are so completely full of it.

Edit:Just for you, I left a commment.

But...


I don't allow comments.


You must have magical powers Sinuhue. :p

If that is true, then why haven't we done so in Europe? Because it's a false assumption.

What governement didn't you like in Europe ?

What you did in Europe was to blackmail the French governement after WW2, to make them kick out the communist ministers or no Marshall plan, while the Communist Party was at that time the first party of the country, and despise the immense role played by the Communist Party in fight against Hitler.

Oh, and you also made BDR to make the KDP illegal, that's for your respect of free speach and democracy.

It's like there are forces at work who will do anything to discredit the US (not you, i'm just venting), even going so far as trying to paint Saddam as a saint.

It's called froth-at-the-mouth anti-Americanism. It's the reason I moved from the left to the right. I just couldn't stand the non-stop 24/7 America-bashing, and I'm not even American.

Got a link to that thread where we were discussing this speech before and all ended up typing like William Shatner? I can't seem to find it.
Hahahhaaa...no...I don't remember what it was called...he wouldn't accept the myriad of translations done there either anyway.

But...



You must have magical powers Sinuhue. :p
I'm amazing, I am...I give you all my powers as well...go forth, sign up for a blog you'll never actually use, and comment on Whittier's wonderful prose...

The US NEWS and World Report is the most reliable news source on earth.
This is one of the predictions I made in 2005, and now it is coming true and Chavez is becoming a real national security threat to the United States and its allies.

"To the United States and it's allies"...

So... what about the rest of the world? What? We don't count?

I guess to you the United States represents the rest of the world. Quite frankly, if the US exploded right now, I wouldn't bat an eye. It'd probably be good for the rest of humanity.

I suppose you missed the part in 2002 when the US tried to oust Hugo... mmm... Yeah. I don't remember Chavez doing any thing like that though. Nope.

US:
Attacks foreign countrys for no reason. Starts illegal wars. Murders countless thousands of civilians. Blames it all on "terrorists" and "ragheads". Denies all of the above.

Venezuala:
Builds affordable housing for the poor. Educates some of it's worst-off citizens. Provides accessable health care. Actually cares about it's citizens, not to mention even those who aren't.

I don't allow comments.

Sort of like Stalin, then?

Watch out! It's the admin NKVD!

American soldiershave not killed many Kurds. There are very few Allied soldiers in the Kurd-dominated provinces of Iraq at all, because the Kurds have been incredibly co-operative.

No, there aren't many people in the Kurdish areas because the Allied soldiers killed them off and left. The remaining Kurds might well be amazingly co-operative, that's very true, but it's obidience rather than love.

There was never a substantial Shia population in Fallujah. Fallujah is a Sunni Arab city in the Sunni triangle - where the brunt of the insurgency is concentrated and where the majority of American soldiers are stationed.

I didn't say that there were many Shias in Falluja, but there were definately thousands. And it was a Sunni Arab city. Get your tenses right.

The insurgency is and always was Sunni Arab - dominated (20% of Iraq's population).

That's irrelevant, it doesn't mean that they won't call Shias or Kurds 'insurgents' if they need to protect their honour.

Sort of like Stalin, then?

Watch out! It's the admin NKVD!
No, really...that not allowing comments thing is just another in a long list of lies. Seriously...go leave a comment...it'll make you feel warm and fuzzy!

No, really...that not allowing comments thing is just another in a long list of lies. Seriously...go leave a comment...it'll make you feel warm and fuzzy!

I don't have a username and pass, I'm afraid, I was about to leave one with two short but sweet words - "You twat"

"To the United States and it's allies"...

So... what about the rest of the world? What? We don't count?

I guess to you the United States represents the rest of the world. Quite frankly, if the US exploded right now, I wouldn't bat an eye. It'd probably be good for the rest of humanity.

I suppose you missed the part in 2002 when the US tried to oust Hugo... mmm... Yeah. I don't remember Chavez doing any thing like that though. Nope.

US:
Attacks foreign countrys for no reason. Starts illegal wars. Murders countless thousands of civilians. Blames it all on "terrorists" and "ragheads". Denies all of the above.

Venezuala:
Builds affordable housing for the poor. Educates some of it's worst-off citizens. Provides accessable health care. Actually cares about it's citizens, not to mention even those who aren't.

US:
Attacks dictators and dictatorial regimes so that people in those countries can vote for their own government. Allows free enterprise, ownership of property, freedom of speech and the press, etc.

Venezuela: Steals property from everyone and gives it away, totally screwing the property owners. Discourages entrepreneurialism, which will (as with all extreme socialist states...) result in a really shitty economy. Cracking down on freedom of speech and of the press. etc. Starting to look like most Communist states, where no opposition is allowed.

US:
Attacks dictators and dictatorial regimes so that people in those countries can vote for their own government. Allows free enterprise, ownership of property, freedom of speech and the press, etc.

Venezuela: Steals property from everyone and gives it away, totally screwing the property owners. Discourages entrepreneurialism, which will (as with all extreme socialist states...) result in a really shitty economy. Cracking down on freedom of speech and of the press. etc.

US : Ignores democratically elected governments in some cases but not others (hates Hamas, supports Sinn Fein, which are a branch of the IRA, which it actually helped), pulls down non-capitalist governments and replaces them with a "better" choice, allows the rich to get richer and the poor to get poorer, and has the PATRIOT at, which means that the Gestapo (oh sorry! I meant Homeland Security!) can do whatever the hell they like.

Venezuala - Takes money and property from the rich, which gives a much better life to the poor and has a popular government. Does not crack down on freedom of speech and the press very much compared to the old regime.



That balances it up a bit more.

US:
Attacks dictators and dictatorial regimes so that people in those countries can vote for their own government. Allows free enterprise, ownership of property, freedom of speech and the press, etc.

Venezuela: Steals property from everyone and gives it away, totally screwing the property owners. Discourages entrepreneurialism, which will (as with all extreme socialist states...) result in a really shitty economy. Cracking down on freedom of speech and of the press. etc. Starting to look like most Communist states, where no opposition is allowed.
:p :p :p

Read the whole thread. You'll see that all your allegations has been debunked.

how many thousands (tens? hundreds?) of Kurds and Shi'a did he kill, torture and/or kidnap?

It's like there are forces at work who will do anything to discredit the US (not you, i'm just venting), even going so far as trying to paint Saddam as a saint.

You fail at observation 101. Did I say Saddam was a saint? No. I didn't. He was as brutal as a dictator and did all sorts of dictator like actions. Was he responsible or at least enabled lots of people to be killed by his forces under him? Yes.

WAS THE DAMNED BODY COUNT HIGHER THAN THAT OF PLACES LIKE NK DURING THE 4+ DECADES IT'S BEEN AROUND?

No, I don't think so.

Nice try at trying the "opposite spectrum" approach Mr. Neo-con. You're obvious attempts at false misdirection are either because you are either being obstinate, mentally deficient, or both.

US : Ignores democratically elected governments in some cases but not others (hates Hamas, supports Sinn Fein, which are a branch of the IRA, which it actually helped), pulls down non-capitalist governments and replaces them with a "better" choice, allows the rich to get richer and the poor to get poorer, and has the PATRIOT at, which means that the Gestapo (oh sorry! I meant Homeland Security!) can do whatever the hell they like.

Venezuala - Takes money and property from the rich, which gives a much better life to the poor and has a popular government. Does not crack down on freedom of speech and the press very much compared to the old regime.



That balances it up a bit more.

hehe, my post had the desired effect.

:))

You fail at observation 101. Did I say Saddam was a saint? No. I didn't. He was as brutal as a dictator and did all sorts of dictator like actions. Was he responsible or at least enabled lots of people to be killed by his forces under him? Yes.

WAS THE DAMNED BODY COUNT HIGHER THAN THAT OF PLACES LIKE NK DURING THE 4+ DECADES IT'S BEEN AROUND?

No, I don't think so.

Nice try at trying the "opposite spectrum" approach Mr. Neo-con. You're obvious attempts at false misdirection are either because you are either being obstinate, mentally deficient, or both.

I missed nothing. I don't believe I was talking about you, and I overstated.

US:
Attacks dictators and dictatorial regimes so that people in those countries can vote for their own government. Allows free enterprise, ownership of property, freedom of speech and the press, etc.

You mean like the Shah of Iran? Amin Idi of Uganda? Batista of Cuba? Chiang Kai-Shek of Taiwan (secret police)? Fahd bin'Abdul-'Azid of Saudi Arabia? Marcos Ferdinand of the Phillipines? Pol Pot of Cambodia? General Suharto of Indonesia? Mohammed Zia Ul-Haq of Pakistan?

Oh suuuuure. Free enterprise if you mean raping of resources by US corporations. Free speech followed by a bullet in the head. Free press if you liked being tortured and executed. The skies the limit so long as you keep the US machine fed with all your resources and support PNAC agendas.

Keep feeding yourself from the silver spoon Fraghead oops, I mean Frangland. It helps keep you from seeing all that blood.

You fail at observation 101. Did I say Saddam was a saint? No. I didn't. He was as brutal as a dictator and did all sorts of dictator like actions. Was he responsible or at least enabled lots of people to be killed by his forces under him? Yes.

WAS THE DAMNED BODY COUNT HIGHER THAN THAT OF PLACES LIKE NK DURING THE 4+ DECADES IT'S BEEN AROUND?

No, I don't think so.

Nice try at trying the "opposite spectrum" approach Mr. Neo-con. You're obvious attempts at false misdirection are either because you are either being obstinate, mentally deficient, or both.

well given my not-horrible IQ and education i'm certainly not mentally deficient -- or modest, for that matter -- so I must be obstinate. hehe

to argue your arguments:

I didn't state that Saddam was worse than what's gone on in NK (or a dozen other countries, for that matter). My aim was to heap some manure on him -- the worse he looks, the better we look for taking him down. I suppose that in that sense, I was acting as Bush's PR lead. hehe

You mean like the Shah of Iran? Amin Idi of Uganda? Batista of Cuba? Chiang Kai-Shek of Taiwan (secret police)? Fahd bin'Abdul-'Azid of Saudi Arabia? Marcos Ferdinand of the Phillipines? Pol Pot of Cambodia? General Suharto of Indonesia? Mohammed Zia Ul-Haq of Pakistan?

Oh suuuuure. Free enterprise if you mean raping of resources by US corporations. Free speech followed by a bullet in the head. Free press if you liked being tortured and executed. The skies the limit so long as you keep the US machine fed with all your resources and support PNAC agendas.

Keep feeding yourself from the silver spoon Fraghead oops, I mean Frangland. It helps keep you from seeing all that blood.

yeah, we put some bad people in power. Or... they turned out to be bad, anyway, though we had to have at least some knowledge that they wouldn't be kind in the Mother T(h)eresa mode.

hehe

sorry, i'm just blabbing. My pants are still wet from the rain.

I didn't state that Saddam was worse than what's gone on in NK (or a dozen other countries, for that matter). My aim was to heap some manure on him -- the worse he looks, the better we look for taking him down. I suppose that in that sense, I was acting as Bush's PR lead. hehe

That manure was paid for with US money I'll have you know. Cracking the china and then smashing the bowl to hide the evidence won't help you when the cops haul you off.

I swear when I first read that, it said, "unfair erections"!

That made me lol :)

Also, whatever happened to the topic of discussion, which was how HUGO CHAVEZ = STALIN :confused: :confused: :confused:

Whittier, why dont you try to come back and enlighten us once again as to why you think this man is just as evil as a mass murderer who killed approximately 4 million more people than Mr Chavez did?

hehe, my post had the desired effect.

:))

Which was what?

Pissing people off so that they'd post something "anti-American"?

OH NOES! CRITICISM!

Its not anti-American (or in my case "unpatriotic") to point out the mistakes a country makes.

"True patriotism is loving what is best about your country and fighting with all your stregnth against what is wrong."

Desgraciadamente sucumbidos por dictadoras, pero no nos olvidamos de vosotros, hermanos!
Y chavez tiene su gracia con Mr danger.. al menos el no puede ir atacando otro paises, ¿por que no quiere o no tiene suficiente potencia?

Mas q nada no le conviene.

Its not anti-American (or in my case "unpatriotic") to point out the mistakes a country makes.

"True patriotism is loving what is best about your country and fighting with all your stregnth against what is wrong."

Dear god, I love you for posting that. Seriously. <3

Desgraciadamente sucumbidos por dictadoras, pero no nos olvidamos de vosotros, hermanos!
Y chavez tiene su gracia con Mr danger.. al menos el no puede ir atacando otro paises, ¿por que no quiere o no tiene suficiente potencia?

Mas q nada no le conviene.

By the power of Babelfish! I command you to translate!

Because it looks like this via machine translation.


Unfortunately succumbed by dictators, but we did not forget you, brothers! And chavez has its grace with Mr danger.. cannot at least be attacking another one paises, so that it does not want or it does not have sufficient power? But q nothing does not agree to him.

Desgraciadamente sucumbidos por dictadoras, pero no nos olvidamos de vosotros, hermanos!
Y chavez tiene su gracia con Mr danger.. al menos el no puede ir atacando otro paises, ¿por que no quiere o no tiene suficiente potencia?

Hubiera Fernando VII acatado la Constitución de Cádiz de 1812 y nos hubiéramos todos ahorrado infinidad de problemas. Pero noooo, ¿para qué las reformas si el absolutismo está bien?

No, there aren't many people in the Kurdish areas because the Allied soldiers killed them off and left. The remaining Kurds might well be amazingly co-operative, that's very true, but it's obidience rather than love.

I didn't say that there were many Shias in Falluja, but there were definately thousands. And it was a Sunni Arab city. Get your tenses right.

That's irrelevant, it doesn't mean that they won't call Shias or Kurds 'insurgents' if they need to protect their honour.

I agree with you on the vast majority what you've said in this thread, but I have to call bullshit here.

Allied troops did not go into Iraqi Kurdistan and commit and sort of mass murder. Where on earth are you hearing this crap? And you're right, the Kurds don't cooperate out of love, they cooperate because they feel it is in their best interest.

Fallujah was not destroyed. Yes, a lot of people were killed, including a lot that shouldn't have been, but Fallujah is still there. Fallujah had a prewar population of about 350k, and it's estimated that there are probably 200k there now. I'm willing to bet that the overwhelmingly vast majority of the 150k that aren't there anymore left town. I'm sure several thousand were killed, but having been a US soldier in Iraq I'll tell you right now that US troops couldn't carry out a massacre on that level. Why? US troops are too idealistic and don't have the stomach for such things.

It's one thing to kill a handful of people because you were scared, it's quite another to conduct systematic mass murder on that scale.

For the record, I disagree with the war. However, I'm not going to sit here and listen to you making ridiculous assertions of that sort.

edit: I'm not trying to downplay what happened in Fallujah. It was a terrible, terrible thing, but your insinuations that Fallujah isn't there anymore are just plain wrong.

PErdona?? tu no eres español verdad? recuerda que al momento entro napoleon bonaparte en españa y nos quedamos en guerra y destrozados usando los recursos militares y grandes mandos de america de vuelta. Asi unos se aprovecharon de la situacion facil y se sublevaron.

I wrote more or less..BEtter english?? lol
Spain doesn't forget Cuba and venezuela, both were spanish until the "sublevation" of Simon bolivar in venezuela and the war of Cuba in 1898 against Usa.
We care of them they are still "brothers" but living in awful dictatorships.

At least chavez is funny calling bush mister Danger. Also that he doesnt attack other countries just for that he would lose more than win.

That is more or less a traduction, i don't remeber

That manure was paid for with US money I'll have you know. Cracking the china and then smashing the bowl to hide the evidence won't help you when the cops haul you off.

well we helped him when he was fighting Iran... stupidly, i guess we thought he wouldn't turn around and use the stuff on his own people.

We never invaded Indonesia or Chile. In fact, we never did anything with Indonesia.
The USA helped General Suharto overthrow the legitimate centre-left government of Sukarno in Indonesia and impose a brutal military dictatorship. Later the USA gave its full support to the régime's "anti-communist" purges in which over a million of its opponents were murdered.

Same with Cambodia. Cambodia only happened because Vietnam invaded it not once but repeatedly. First before the US even stepped foot in Cambodia, we only went in to kick the Vietcong commies out. Then they did twice more after we withdrew from Vietnam and even set up a puppet socialist regime that proceeded to kill its own people. Ever hear of the Khmer Rouge?
Vietnam, with the support of the Soviet Union, invaded Cambodia in order to overthrow the racist Khmer Rouge régime which was murdering millions of innocent people, many of Vietnamese origin. Both China and the USA later went on to fund and arm the Khmer Rouge rebels.

Do you think Hugo Chavez shot JFK?

... mister Danger...

Ahhh. Mr. Danger is Spanish translates into English as... Mr. Danger....

Hmmm.... ingenious....
*strokes chin*

By the power of Babelfish! I command you to translate!

Because it looks like this via machine translation.

ROFL, that translation is hilarious. Thanks for the comedy relief... i needed it.

Do you think Hugo Chavez shot JFK?

No, but Chavez and Lee Harvey (as well as all the other factons involved in the assassination..) were boyhood amigos.

hehe

I agree with you on the vast majority what you've said in this thread, but I have to call bullshit here.

Allied troops did not go into Iraqi Kurdistan and commit and sort of mass murder. Where on earth are you hearing this crap? And you're right, the Kurds don't cooperate out of love, they cooperate because they feel it is in their best interest.

Fallujah was not destroyed. Yes, a lot of people were killed, including a lot that shouldn't have been, but Fallujah is still there. Fallujah had a prewar population of about 350k, and it's estimated that there are probably 200k there now. I'm willing to bet that the overwhelmingly vast majority of the 150k that aren't there anymore left town. I'm sure several thousand were killed, but having been a US soldier in Iraq I'll tell you right now that US troops couldn't carry out a massacre on that level. Why? US troops are too idealistic and don't have the stomach for such things.

It's one thing to kill a handful of people because you were scared, it's quite another to conduct systematic mass murder on that scale.

For the record, I disagree with the war. However, I'm not going to sit here and listen to you making ridiculous assertions of that sort.

I've heard from a guy who's just come back from Iraq that soldiers from both the USA and the UK did go up to the Kurdish areas, but that the Kurds started attacking them (admittedly, not all of them, but a large amount). He said that his platoon and a couple of American ones must have killed well over five hundred Kurds up there, and that there were other troops up there in the same kind of conditions.

That said, he may well have been overplaying what actually happened to make his story sound better. I reckon that the truth is going to be somewhere in between what I've said and what you've said.

And I believe that the USA used chemical weapons as well as vast amounts of artillery on Falluja (along with the Iraqi Army). I wouldn't be impossible, to my mind at least, that most of the "missing" people died.

That said, if I'm totally wrong, then I take it all back.

Do you think Hugo Chavez shot JFK?

THEY WERE BOTH SOCIALISTS, AND EVERYBODY KNOWS THAT ALL SOCIALISTS ARE BLOODTHIRSTY BASTARDS, SO YES!!!

I LOVE AMERICA! AMERICA FOR LIFE! IF YOU DISAGREE THEN YOU ARE AUTOMATICALLY A TERRORIST LIBERAL!!!

FUCK LIBERALS!!! :upyours: :upyours: :upyours:

Sorry, venting some steam there. And in case you couldn't tell, that was obvious sarcasm ;)

to Psychotic Mongooses
Just to make sure..
maybe you haven't seen the speech of hugo chavez on tv calling bush MR DANGER it was here in spain a few weeks ago. Really funny...lol

to Psychotic Mongooses
Just to make sure..
maybe you haven't seen the speech of hugo chavez on tv calling bush MR DANGER it was here in spain a few weeks ago. Really funny...lol

:D Some things just translate for comedy gold :D

I've heard from a guy who's just come back from Iraq that soldiers from both the USA and the UK did go up to the Kurdish areas, but that the Kurds started attacking them (admittedly, not all of them, but a large amount). He said that his platoon and a couple of American ones must have killed well over five hundred Kurds up there, and that there were other troops up there in the same kind of conditions.

That said, he may well have been overplaying what actually happened to make his story sound better. I reckon that the truth is going to be somewhere in between what I've said and what you've said.

And I believe that the USA used chemical weapons as well as vast amounts of artillery on Falluja (along with the Iraqi Army). I wouldn't be impossible, to my mind at least, that most of the "missing" people died.

That said, if I'm totally wrong, then I take it all back.

I can't say his story didn't happen because I wasn't ever in the northern areas, I was in Ar Ramadi, Habbiniyah, and Fallujah most of my tour there. Also, things may be different since I left in Apr 04. However, I do think he was over-exaggerating the amounts of Kurds they killed. Where I was engagements involving more than 15-20 enemy personnel were extremely rare. But then, perhaps Kurds do things differently, but 500 people sounds extremely exaggerated.

The US most certainly used massive amounts of artillery in Fallujah, as well as airstrikes, but what chemical weapons do you think they used? That particular operation happened well after I got out of the Army.

I know they were using white phosphorous (something they shouldn't have used), but that's not a lethal enough weapon to kill 150k people. However, if the US used any sort of nerve agent, blood agent, etc. we would have heard about it. Everyone in the area would have had to wear protective gear, and that alone sends off all kinds of red flags to everyone, even if they have no direct knowledge of chemical weapons being used. I'm absolutely certain somebody would have let the cat out of the bag, because that's far too many soldiers to be able to keep a secret of that magnitude.

I've met Venezuelans. One of my close friends is married to a Venezuelan girl and I've met her, her sister, and some of their friends. They don't like Chavez.

I've met plenty of yanks who don't like bush and would happily see him removed from office and tried as a war criminal .... whats your point?

Chavez is about 20 million deaths short of Stalin.

lol me too =)

PErdona?? tu no eres español verdad? recuerda que al momento entro napoleon bonaparte en españa y nos quedamos en guerra y destrozados usando los recursos militares y grandes mandos de america de vuelta. Asi unos se aprovecharon de la situacion facil y se sublevaron.
Se sublevaron al grito de "¡Viva Fernando VII!" y cuando éste regresa a Madrid en 1814, de haber adoptado la Constitución de 1812 y negociado una nueva relación con las colonias en vez de reinstaurar el absolutismo, es muy probable que hubieran aceptado.

Para 1820 ya fue demasiado tarde.

I'm sure several thousand were killed, but having been a US soldier in Iraq I'll tell you right now that US troops couldn't carry out a massacre on that level.

Why not? An air force pilot can't see the people he's bombing. At least not while their burning or lying about in body parts because he's already gone from the area.


Why? US troops are too idealistic and don't have the stomach for such things.

Where on earth did you get that idea? US troops are human, just like the rest of us. Dehumanize your target enough to their minds, and they'll treat them like shiit or worse. Heck, if you do a good enough job, they'll cheerfully execute a whole bunch by the cityload. While on a smaller scale, they certainly didn't have an issue of lack of stomach when it came to butchering everyone in villages in Vietnam.

What makes you think they couldn't do it now?

I'm not saying they did or not, but believing they wouldn't because of idealism is in itself, idealism. And idealism hardly ever squares with reality.

I can't say his story didn't happen because I wasn't ever in the northern areas, I was in Ar Ramadi, Habbiniyah, and Fallujah most of my tour there. Also, things may be different since I left in Apr 04. However, I do think he was over-exaggerating the amounts of Kurds they killed. Where I was engagements involving more than 15-20 enemy personnel were extremely rare. But then, perhaps Kurds do things differently, but 500 people sounds extremely exaggerated.

The US most certainly used massive amounts of artillery in Fallujah, as well as airstrikes, but what chemical weapons do you think they used? That particular operation happened well after I got out of the Army.

I know they were using white phosphorous (something they shouldn't have used), but that's not a lethal enough weapon to kill 150k people. However, if the US used any sort of nerve agent, blood agent, etc. we would have heard about it. Everyone in the area would have had to wear protective gear, and that alone sends off all kinds of red flags to everyone, even if they have no direct knowledge of chemical weapons being used. I'm absolutely certain somebody would have let the cat out of the bag, because that's far too many soldiers to be able to keep a secret of that magnitude.

Pepper spray is techincally a chemical weapon. Maybe they just got a giant water balloon filled with it, and their eyeballs shrivelled up and they died >_>

But seriously, from what I know, white phosphorus is VERY explosive and VERY lethal. AlthougH I do agree, I dont see how it could kill150k people.

Then again, how do you kill 150k people when there are only 500 people attacking you?

I know they were using white phosphorous (something they shouldn't have used), but that's not a lethal enough weapon to kill 150k people.

WP is indeed lethal.

Then again, how do you kill 150k people when there are only 500 people attacking you?

I highly doubt there were only 500 people attacking US troops in Fallujah. But the answer to that is being absolutely, completely, scared shitless.

Why not? An air force pilot can't see the people he's bombing. At least not while their burning or lying about in body parts because he's already gone from the area.

True, I can imagine that it's much easier to kill people from the air.


Where on earth did you get that idea? US troops are human, just like the rest of us. Dehumanize your target enough to their minds, and they'll treat them like shiit or worse. Heck, if you do a good enough job, they'll cheerfully execute a whole bunch by the cityload. While on a smaller scale, they certainly didn't have an issue of lack of stomach when it came to butchering everyone in villages in Vietnam.

By the time I had left Iraq they hadn't done nearly that good a job of dehumanizing the Iraqis. That's where I got that idea.

And yes, US troops, like any other human beings, are quite capable of depravity and slaughter. However, when I was there (things may have changed dramatically in the last 2 years) the culture that would allow such a thing just wasn't there.

Also, I just came across this interesting video on Fallujah, and I'm starting to have seconds thoughts about my position.

Warning: this video is a bit graphic at times, watch at your own peril.

http://videolive.rai.it:8080/asxgen/ran24/fallujah_ING.wmv

WP is indeed lethal.

It is quite lethal, but you would have to use a ridiculous amount of it to kill 150k people, even in conjunction with small arms and artillery fire.

That was hilarious! Pure gold satire of the usual right wing BS concerning latin american populist governments.:) At first I thought that you might be serious, but it was so over the top that I started laughing halfway through.

Can you do another one? Maybe about Canada this time?
Seriously, what a bunch of Right-wing BS. Hail Hugo!

I highly doubt there were only 500 people attacking US troops in Fallujah. But the answer to that is being absolutely, completely, scared shitless.
http://videolive.rai.it:8080/asxgen/ran24/fallujah_ING.wmv

Oh, he was talking about Fallujah. I presumed he was talking about his little friends story where 500 guys were attacking his troupe of 20, and then they magically killed 150k iraqis.

@Collective Socialists: Although Hugo isnt a bad guy, I tink Castro is 8324915729057 times better. So you should be shouting HAIL CASTRO!

Hmm, after watching that video on Fallujah, I'll concede the point on chemical weapons.

America never called for the destruction of another nation. America never supported the deaths of innocents you terrorist sympathizer.

Calling someone a name doesn't make your inane post any more factual so please stop doing it. People are tired of you ilk, feeling that to belittle your opponent makes you right. You can call me a nazi, a terrorist sympathizer, or any of your other rabid right wing talking points. The fact remains that I disagree and have read a mutltitude of posts by you that have no basis in fact. Some of your information is just flat out made up, and cannot be cited in any reputable source. When you get called to task on it you pull out the "anti-american, etc." scapegoat lines like a good little propogandist.

1. The United States, and more specifically, the Bush family sponsored the rise of the Third Reich. Follow the money, as has been done by several historians in books and white papers.

2. If the Bush adminsitration never supported the Taliban, why did they give them $53 million in the summer of 2001? Could it have been for a transcountinental pipeline?

3. If the US never sponsors terrorism then why did they give 6 billion to Al Quaeda (Afghan Mujahdeen) in 1989? Did they want them to talk the Russians to death?

4. The US never sponsored counter revolutionary movements? Pinochet, the Shah of Iran, Iran-Contra, Korea, Vietnam, et al. are proof that your idealist view of the American government is very skewed. The United States has always seen fit to support dictators when those dictators played by their rules. It's only when they become defiant that they are a threat and need to be stopped.

Your myopic, xenophobic view of the world is your primary problem Whittier. Maybe you should travel more, get to know the world on a more intimate basis then from the comfort of your easy chair. Then maybe you'd have some perspective to speak in context about such things. in the words of another revolutionary (regarding your wonderful blog) "If you go platinum, it's got nothing to do with luck it just means that a million (10,000) people are stupid as F" IT

Wow...with 10,000 readers...there are a shocking lack of comments....
God, Whittier...you are so completely full of it.

Edit:Just for you, I left a commment.
But....but...Whittier stated just a few posts ago that he doesn't allow comments!! More deceit?

http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=10807153&postcount=253

Whittier does allow comments after all. I know, I saw them. Hmmmm.

I know they were using white phosphorous (something they shouldn't have used), but that's not a lethal enough weapon to kill 150k people. However, if the US used any sort of nerve agent, blood agent, etc. we would have heard about it. Everyone in the area would have had to wear protective gear, and that alone sends off all kinds of red flags to everyone, even if they have no direct knowledge of chemical weapons being used. I'm absolutely certain somebody would have let the cat out of the bag, because that's far too many soldiers to be able to keep a secret of that magnitude.

Napalm was supposedly used as well as WP. WP and Napalm could easily kill 150k people in a city of 350K, in conjunction with the airstrikes and artillery, as well as the assault on the city with tanks and soldiers.

*edits*

Fucking hell... that video is shocking... and it looks like some kind of gas-based weapon must have been used, from the strange injuries used.

Napalm was supposedly used as well as WP. WP and Napalm could easily kill 150k people in a city of 350K, in conjunction with the airstrikes and artillery, as well as the assault on the city with tanks and soldiers.

*edits*

Fucking hell... that video is shocking... and it looks like some kind of gas-based weapon must have been used, from the strange injuries used.
I do not believe that the US used napalm on Fallujah, but they did use WP. Also, I do not believe that anywhere near 150K died in Fallujah as a result of the 2 assaults on that city. I believe the number would be in the thousands though.

Originally Posted by Whittier---
America never called for the destruction of another nation. America never supported the deaths of innocents you terrorist sympathizer
Indeed! Ignore those lesser nations who somehow think they can look down upon America. It was us who saved their ass in both world wars, and us who once agin snatched them from the jaws of the USSR!

They can claim that Castro and Chavez are great.
But the will nbever, ever get anyway with their claims.
Why?
Put simply, mainstream America doesn't give a monkeys turd about their opinions, and will never allow anyone like them to run the country.

(I can see the map now...Venezuela is no more, replaced with...New Louisana!)

@Collective Socialists: Although Hugo isnt a bad guy, I tink Castro is 8324915729057 times better. So you should be shouting HAIL CASTRO!

We should not be shouting "HAIL" anybody. No gods, no masters.

Castro is an authoritarian statist who deserves opposition from genuine socialists, though also a limited sort of support against the efforts of US imperialism to replace him with a neoliberal regime that will annihilate the social benefits secured by the Revolution.

Revolution.
He he. He capitilized revolution.

He he. He capitilized revolution.

Because I was referring to a specific revolution, namely, the Cuban Revolution.

Oh I know...but it just reminded me of those crazy socialists. "The Revolution" and all.

A South American Stalin

I'm still waiting to be told why Chavez is a South American Stalin, rather than a South American Andropov or a South American Chernenko.

I do not believe that the US used napalm on Fallujah, but they did use WP. Also, I do not believe that anywhere near 150K died in Fallujah as a result of the 2 assaults on that city. I believe the number would be in the thousands though.

Fine then, MK77 and not napalm. MK77, WP, massive artillery and airstrike bombardments and then soldiers who probably didn't want to be there and were paranoid (totally understandable, I must say), with tanks, weapons and the notice that anyone they saw on the street was a target may well have killed 150k.

I wouldn't find that particularly hard to believe.

Fine then, MK77 and not napalm. MK77, WP, massive artillery and airstrike bombardments and then soldiers who probably didn't want to be there and were paranoid (totally understandable, I must say), with tanks, weapons and the notice that anyone they saw on the street was a target may well have killed 150k.

I wouldn't find that particularly hard to believe.

According to the US government WP was used, but not MK77's. Make of that what you will.

According to the US government WP was used, but not MK77's. Make of that what you will.

Yeah, but the soldiers in the video said that napalm or something similar was almost certainly used, too.

Yeah, but the soldiers in the video said that napalm or something similar was almost certainly used, too.

Maybe they've already got something better than napalm. Either that or they did the Chinese piracy bit. Take the existing model, fiddle a bit, call it another name and hey presto "We're not using napalm at all"

Maybe they've already got something better than napalm. Either that or they did the Chinese piracy bit. Take the existing model, fiddle a bit, call it another name and hey presto "We're not using napalm at all"

Yeah, that's exactly what MK77 is. It's an incendiary weapon with the same properties as napalm, but a slightly different formula, so that the USA doesn't get pulled up for using it on civilians, unlike napalm, which you can't use on civilians.

Napalm was used on Republican Guard units, although doubtless there was some "collateral damage".

And the use of WP should really get at least Rumsfeld and some of the higher ranks in prison for the illegal use of chemical weapons.

I'm still waiting to be told why Chavez is a South American Stalin, rather than a South American Andropov or a South American Chernenko.
I think Whittier can't make up his mind whether Chavez is a South American Stalin or a South American Hitler:

Just some of the latest antics of the Hitler of South America (http://robertsworldview.blogspot.com/2006/04/insanity-of-chavez-continues.html). As you can see we have all the excuse we need to launch a justified military attack on Venezuela and free its people from Hugo Chavez, the Hitler of South America.

The bottom line is that Whittier is confused with not only what title to slap on Chavez, but also with reality.

Whittier, have you had a bad dream about Chavez, did he touch you, because you seem a bit pissed off with him and venezuela.


from reading your 10,000 blog

ww3 = Mighty USA and rest of the glorious free world vs Evil Iran, Evil Russia and Evil Venezuela.
Thats a pretty messed up view of the world. Check up on facts next time you post another inspiring thread like this.

Whittier, have you had a bad dream about Chavez, did he touch you, because you seem a bit pissed off with him and venezuela.


from reading your 10,000 blog

ww3 = Mighty USA and rest of the glorious free world vs Evil Iran, Evil Russia and Evil Venezuela.

Ah, but don't forget that Whittier is 'the only real American' (he states so himself), and so it's actually 'Whittier vs Evil Iran, Evil Russia and Evil Venezuela'.

Good luck. I have about 10,000 readers of my blog. You will never reach them with your anti american lies.
Well, they're willing dupes, so there's no reaching them in any event.

Well, they're willing dupes, so there's no reaching them in any event.

How do we know it's not just Whittier reading it 10,000 times from a different com so he can feel good about himself? :p

I think Whittier can't make up his mind whether Chavez is a South American Stalin or a South American Hitler:

Just some of the latest antics of the Hitler of South America (http://robertsworldview.blogspot.com/2006/04/insanity-of-chavez-continues.html). As you can see we have all the excuse we need to launch a justified military attack on Venezuela and free its people from Hugo Chavez, the Hitler of South America.

The bottom line is that Whittier is confused with not only what title to slap on Chavez, but also with reality.


Hitler of South America?

The Lenin or Stalin of South America, maybe... but Hitler?

Good luck. I have about 10,000 readers of my blog. You will never reach them with your anti american lies.

Unleash the anti-American lie bomb! Nothing shall protect these last brave 10,000 who stand in our way.

Hitler of South America?

The Lenin or Stalin of South America, maybe... but Hitler?
I don't think that Chavez should be even mentioned in the same sentence as either of those two brutal dictators but it was Whittier who has dubbed Chavez both a Hitler and a Stalin. Check the link in my previous post.

I don't think that Chavez should be even mentioned in the same sentence as either of those two brutal dictators but it was Whittier who has dubbed Chavez both a Hitler and a Stalin.

Are we to take it that Chavez is therefore at war with himself?

How do we know it's not just Whittier reading it 10,000 times from a different com so he can feel good about himself? :p
I bet he doesn't even have 10000 readers. He lied about not allowing comments too.

I don't think that Chavez should be even mentioned in the same sentence as either of those two brutal dictators but it was Whittier who has dubbed Chavez both a Hitler and a Stalin. Check the link in my previous post.

well economically... he could be mentioned with Lenin and Stalin. Thankfully (to our knowledge) he hasn't killed off everyone who's in opposition.

Are we to take it that Chavez is therefore at war with himself?
Actually, it is the OP who is at war with himself? :rolleyes:

well economically... he could be mentioned with Lenin and Stalin. Thankfully (to our knowledge) he hasn't killed off everyone who's in opposition.

If you wish to be absurd anyone that is not uber-capitalist "economically could be mentioned with Lenin and Stalin." But that is just silly. It's a pathetic attempt to demonize by loose association.

I'm glad you at least concede that Chavez is not totalitarian.

well economically... he could be mentioned with Lenin and Stalin. Thankfully (to our knowledge) he hasn't killed off everyone who's in opposition.
I believe that you are way off base? Chavez's Venezuela is a democratic country that favours progressive socialism, and as far as I know, he hasn't tried to purge any of the opposition.

Wow...with 10,000 readers...there are a shocking lack of comments....
God, Whittier...you are so completely full of it.

Edit:Just for you, I left a commment.
looks like someone else did too and they disagreed with you.

I'll just have to figure how the comments section got opened and shut it down.

And you called Chavez Stalin-esque...

looks like someone else did too and they disagreed with you.

I'll just have to figure how the comments section got opened and shut it down.
You know, you could just buy a diary if you want nobody to comment.;)

Well well well.

Mr. Chavez spares no expense to bash America, limit freedom and threaten his neigbors, but for some reason. All supposedly for the reason giving a free ride to his communist supporters. Yet he refuses to protect his own people from his henchmen.


http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060421/ap_on_re_la_am_ca/venezuela_unchecked_violence_lh1;_ylt=Aht5dcnKiehMwO8RTpyVEe69IxIF;_ylu=X3oDMTA4NTMzazIyBHNlYwMxNjk2

According to one victim of Chavez' henchmen:
"You can't even go out nowadays because you're afraid of everything,"

According to one victim of Chavez' henchmen:
"You can't even go out nowadays because you're afraid of everything,"

Are you suggesting that the unidentified teenager was in pay of the president?

Well well well.

Mr. Chavez spares no expense to bash America, limit freedom and threaten his neigbors, but for some reason. All supposedly for the reason giving a free ride to his communist supporters. Yet he refuses to protect his own people from his henchmen.


http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060421/ap_on_re_la_am_ca/venezuela_unchecked_violence_lh1;_ylt=Aht5dcnKiehMwO8RTpyVEe69IxIF;_ylu=X3oDMTA4NTMzazIyBHNlYwMxNjk2

According to one victim of Chavez' henchmen:
"You can't even go out nowadays because you're afraid of everything,"

"Have you no sense of decency sir, at long last? Have you left no sense of decency? "

Why does reading your posts so often bring that quote to mind?

And the bout continues: Whittier vs. reality
Tune in next time to see the rest.

And the bout continues: Whittier vs. reality
Tune in next time to see the rest.

Ten bucks on Reality! :D

Well well well.

Mr. Chavez spares no expense to bash America, limit freedom and threaten his neigbors, but for some reason. All supposedly for the reason giving a free ride to his communist supporters. Yet he refuses to protect his own people from his henchmen.


http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060421/ap_on_re_la_am_ca/venezuela_unchecked_violence_lh1;_ylt=Aht5dcnKiehMwO8RTpyVEe69IxIF;_ylu=X3oDMTA4NTMzazIyBHNlYwMxNjk2

According to one victim of Chavez' henchmen:
"You can't even go out nowadays because you're afraid of everything,"
After being totally eviscerated in this thread, you have the temerity to try and open a new front in your personal war on Hugo Chavez. That is a difficult option since your credibility meter is stuck at zero.

You have stated before that you believe in God. However, I find it difficult that God believes in you.

Face facts people.
Chavez regime is so ruthless and beholden to criminal interests, that government will be ousted by the Venezuelan people and he will be placed on trial just like Pinochet in Chile.
Under Chavez, Venezuela is suffering the highest violent crime rate in its entire history and the government is doing absolutely nothing about it. Why? Simple, the people doing the killing are Chavez supporters.


Now I've even got an update on the European sale of weapons to Chavez. Course it's a couple of days old. Turns out it was a Chavez sympathizer at the spanish embassy in Venezuela who set that up. Looks like Spain did a little investigating and fired the weasel. Too bad my unreliable i net went out cause I was going to shove the link in your anti-american faces.


And you all should admit the main fact here:
That the only reason you support Chavez is that you really really hate Bush and that you will support any one who hates Bush, even if they support international terrorism and oppress their own people.

Face facts people

that's soooo cute!

well someone has been gravedigging...

And you all should admit the main fact here:
That the only reason you support Chavez is that you really really hate Bush and that you will support any one who hates Bush, even if they support international terrorism and oppress their own people.
And you, whittier--, should face the fact that not all socialists are evil and that our opinion of someone is not based on what they think of the US.

And you all should admit the main fact here:
That the only reason you support Chavez is that you really really hate Bush and that you will support any one who hates Bush, even if they support international terrorism and oppress their own people.

I couldn't care less about Bush. You elected him, you live with him. The same goes for Chavez and the people of Venezuela though. They elected him, he is their president. What difference does it make to you Whittier?

Face facts people.
Chavez regime is so ruthless and beholden to criminal interests, that government will be ousted by the Venezuelan people and he will be placed on trial just like Pinochet in Chile.
Under Chavez, Venezuela is suffering the highest violent crime rate in its entire history and the government is doing absolutely nothing about it. Why? Simple, the people doing the killing are Chavez supporters.
Well, he couldn't do it without a little help from his friends:
http://www.csmonitor.com/2005/0810/p01s04-woam.html

Now I've even got an update on the European sale of weapons to Chavez. Course it's a couple of days old. Turns out it was a Chavez sympathizer at the spanish embassy in Venezuela who set that up. Looks like Spain did a little investigating and fired the weasel. Too bad my unreliable i net went out cause I was going to shove the link in your anti-american faces.
Really? Very strange that El País mentions absolutely nothing of the sort. Of course, it could be another one of your lies and the internet thing just a convenient excuse. Besides, the deal has been signed by Zapatero even.

And you all should admit the main fact here:
That the only reason you support Chavez is that you really really hate Bush and that you will support any one who hates Bush, even if they support international terrorism and oppress their own people.
Bullocks. I don't totally support Chavez, but I also don't support delirious ranting maniacs on internet forums or US interventionism in Latin America to get rid of an elected leader just because he's too red for their taste.

well someone has been gravedigging...
At least this thread is just a few days old and not months old like some of the resurrected threads lately.

It's always a threat when people go crazy and ELECT A SOCIALIST GOVERNMENT. It shows they want some socialism, and that does not compute. You must save these insane people from themselves...the tested and tried way...by overthrowing their elected government, and installing brutal dictators who then go hog wild, torturing, raping and killing those people. Kind of like how the Spanish Inquisition saved heretics by BURNING THEM ALIVE.

"Well, that's a relief...another heretic that won't burn for eternity in hellfire!"

Hmmm.

it's so true... we have Tony Blair... to prove it...
what's doing the Bush cartel to help the UK???

But alas it's too late now, the great asshole gave back the terrorists from his secret concentration camp... he fears reprisals form the socialist UK.
I've to go maybe they'll jail my IP again...

Good luck the world...

Now let's pray for all these ill minded socialists. Amen.

The rebelious Great High Priest

Well, i've just read the whole thread, and I have to say that is the most i've ever seen a person get pwned in an internet debate. Really.

Still, you have to admire his spirit. He will never just give up and admit he's wrong.

Face facts people.
Chavez regime is so ruthless and beholden to criminal interests, that government will be ousted by the Venezuelan people and he will be placed on trial just like Pinochet in Chile.
Under Chavez, Venezuela is suffering the highest violent crime rate in its entire history and the government is doing absolutely nothing about it. Why? Simple, the people doing the killing are Chavez supporters.


Now I've even got an update on the European sale of weapons to Chavez. Course it's a couple of days old. Turns out it was a Chavez sympathizer at the spanish embassy in Venezuela who set that up. Looks like Spain did a little investigating and fired the weasel. Too bad my unreliable i net went out cause I was going to shove the link in your anti-american faces.


And you all should admit the main fact here:
That the only reason you support Chavez is that you really really hate Bush and that you will support any one who hates Bush, even if they support international terrorism and oppress their own people.
Check out US arms sales to South American countries (http://www.worldpolicy.org/projects/arms/reports/MilitaryAidLA110405.html)and get back to me when you find some truly credible news stories.

BTW, Columbia's murder rate (http://www.nationmaster.com/graph-T/cri_mur_percap)is almost double Venezuela's.

More details supplied upon request.

I couldn't care less about Bush. You elected him, you live with him. The same goes for Chavez and the people of Venezuela though. They elected him, he is their president. What difference does it make to you Whittier?
Whittier doesn't believe in democracy.

Hitler of South America?

The Lenin or Stalin of South America, maybe... but Hitler?


Well, Rumsfeld seems to think that's appropriate.

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2006/02/03/politics/main1279205.shtml

Now I've even got an update on the European sale of weapons to Chavez. Course it's a couple of days old. Turns out it was a Chavez sympathizer at the spanish embassy in Venezuela who set that up. Looks like Spain did a little investigating and fired the weasel. Too bad my unreliable i net went out cause I was going to shove the link in your anti-american faces.

Eh?

Why would you need to "shove it in our faces"?

If you were possibly a bit more reasonable about the whole affair, then maybe you'd win more supporters, rather than your previous posts, which have mainly amounted to : "Socialists can fuck off and die, you're all terrorist Stalinist fascist commies" or whatever.

And you all should admit the main fact here:
That the only reason you support Chavez is that you really really hate Bush and that you will support any one who hates Bush, even if they support international terrorism and oppress their own people.

No, the reason that I support Chavez is because he's a socialist who's giving the finger to the Bush administration, who are putting more and more pressure on him to become a capitalist and sell the US oil at cheap prices.

I'd do the same if I was Chavez.

And the real supporters of terrorism are the USA. They're quite happy to let "freedom fighters in an oppressive state" launch a coup, and have supported many groups that killed thousands of people to get into power, but as soon as anyone asks whether the Iraqis are simply freedom fighters, the US government goes into "9/11 sympathy crap" mode.

I myself am sick and tired of the US government's exploition of what is, undoubtedly, a tragic event as a shelter to protect them from criticism.



*edits*

Valdania - Rummie's a fool, though.

God has heard my prayers:

http://news.ft.com/cms/s/1d5dfe3a-d653-11da-8b3a-0000779e2340.html

Chavez not only lies to his own people but he lies to the world as well.
Just a month ago he claimed Venezuela had more oil than Saudi Arabia.
Well, Saudi Arabia, unlike Venezuela, does not have to buy other nation's oil in order to fulfill its own contracts.

While he promises nearly free oil to other countries in Latin America in return for their conversion to communism and an anti american alliance, Venezuela's oil output has actually been declining significantly.

I was wrong about the Bush plan in this area. It's brilliant. Venezuela is going to suffer a big economic collapse soon. That and the fact of Chavez henchmen killing innocent people will cause Venezuelans to oust his candy ass from office.

God has heard my prayers:

http://news.ft.com/cms/s/1d5dfe3a-d653-11da-8b3a-0000779e2340.html

Chavez not only lies to his own people but he lies to the world as well.
Just a month ago he claimed Venezuela had more oil than Saudi Arabia.
Well, Saudi Arabia, unlike Venezuela, does not have to buy other nation's oil in order to fulfill its own contracts.

While he promises nearly free oil to other countries in Latin America in return for their conversion to communism and an anti american alliance, Venezuela's oil output has actually been declining significantly.

I was wrong about the Bush plan in this area. It's brilliant. Venezuela is going to suffer a big economic collapse soon. That and the fact of Chavez henchmen killing innocent people will cause Venezuelans to oust his candy ass from office.

You prayed for the economical collapse of a third world country? How Christian of you.

*sigh*

My sister lives in Venezuala, she teaches at a private school where rich American CEOs send their kids. The claim that Venezuala as a whole hates America as a whole is flimsy at best. It's leader hates Bush. BTW, last time I talked with her I believe she mentioned Chavez made an offer to sell gas at cheap rates to certain sectors of NYC.

Comparing the man to Stalin is flattery, Chavez simply could not get away with mass murder, at least not on Stalin's scale. He's not powerful enough. And he sure as hell does not have the, bureacratic militarily readied super-power nation that Stalin had.

The nation, from her description, is filled with small scattered villages inland (example Colonial Tovar, small German settlement nestled in hills)with developing cities, and the coastline is packed with the impoverished living in horrible conditions. From her description, they couldn't possibly have the energy to hate 250 million people they've never met.

It disturbs me, are people more concerned about helping a group of impoverished people, or are the more obsessed with beating the other nation to prove their superiority? If we really wanted to change the situation and change it well we'd be discussing economic reforms, not military action. Did it ever occur that maybe some nations are simply too poor to have a democracy? Elections would be extremely costly, especially without an efficient reliable mail service or even modern electronics.

God has heard my prayers:

http://news.ft.com/cms/s/1d5dfe3a-d653-11da-8b3a-0000779e2340.html

Chavez not only lies to his own people but he lies to the world as well.
Just a month ago he claimed Venezuela had more oil than Saudi Arabia.
Well, Saudi Arabia, unlike Venezuela, does not have to buy other nation's oil in order to fulfill its own contracts.

He did, and his declarations were backed-up by his good friends, the US Department of Energy: http://www.gregpalast.com/detail.cfm?artid=485&row=1

"The US DoE report shows that at today's prices Venezuela's oil reserves are bigger than those of the entire Middle East including Saudi Arabia, the Gulf states, Iran and Iraq. The US DoE also identifies Canada as another future oil superpower. Venezuela's deposits alone could extend the oil age for another 100 years."

He was referring to the extra-heavy oil deposits in the Orinoco that would be profitable at current prices. So, that wasn't a lie.

And yes, he'll probably have to do something to increase production or face an economic collapse, as has been warned to him more than once. Maybe the Venezuelans will react then, or maybe they'll blame the "foreign markets" and keep him. Who knows?

You prayed for the economical collapse of a third world country? How Christian of you.
yes. It is the only way to help the oppressed people of Venezuela: to pray that God would let this happen to their government, that the people may be able to free themselves of tyranny.

If the economy collapses, then Chavez has no more money to fund his henchmen vigilantes. He can't bribe good people anymore. All his deals he made by offering penny cheap oil in return for anti america alliances, will be reneged. Meaning that agreements with Venezuela won't be worth the paper they're printed on.

And lo, behold, already people in South America are opposing him. Bolivia has just said they absolutely will not join the "insane" (their word for it not mine) Chavez alliance.

We must do all we can to support Bolivia.

And the best part: Chavistas celebrate that Chavez is attempting to bribe 120,000 Americans with cheap oil. But there are actually 2 million Americans boycotting his gas stations. That is rich.
We should support the boycott.

Check this out: we need to support Mexico in all disputes against Venezuela. And start being more respectful of Mexican immigrants: why? Because Mexico is our number one foreign supplier of oil. Venezuela ranks barely number 5.

And Mexico, like Bolivia, opposes Chavez. Thank God for Mexico.
I say we give amnesty to illegals from Mexico and Bolivia but screw the people from pro Chavez nations (unless they are political refugees seeking asylum from government sponsored oppression).

yes. It is the only way to help the oppressed people of Venezuela: to pray that God would let this happen to their government, that the people may be able to free themselves of tyranny.

...


And Mexico, like Bolivia, opposes Chavez. Thank God for Mexico.
I say we give amnesty to illegals from Mexico and Bolivia but screw the people from pro Chavez nations (unless they are political refugees seeking asylum from government sponsored oppression).


Where in the Bible is the instruction to 'screw the people'?

He did, and his declarations were backed-up by his good friends, the US Department of Energy: http://www.gregpalast.com/detail.cfm?artid=485&row=1

"The US DoE report shows that at today's prices Venezuela's oil reserves are bigger than those of the entire Middle East including Saudi Arabia, the Gulf states, Iran and Iraq. The US DoE also identifies Canada as another future oil superpower. Venezuela's deposits alone could extend the oil age for another 100 years."

He was referring to the extra-heavy oil deposits in the Orinoco that would be profitable at current prices. So, that wasn't a lie.

And yes, he'll probably have to do something to increase production or face an economic collapse, as has been warned to him more than once. Maybe the Venezuelans will react then, or maybe they'll blame the "foreign markets" and keep him. Who knows?

would you join me in praying for a collapse?

It should be noted that a lot of the restrictions placed on the media are to control US Govt influence on the media. Often times much of the human rights abuses committed by these nations are only in response to US meddling is other countries.

Castro and Guevara enacted many of their restrictive policies to counteract US actions that they saw personally in Guatemala.

With that said, I still don't trust Chavez. Not enough to oppose him, though.

But if you really want to get an idea of what the people of these countries believe, and want...go visit them in their homes.

Fat chance of that. In places like Cuba, even criticizing the government can get you thrown in jail. You really think people are going to tell how they really feel?

would you join me in praying for a collapse?
Nope.

If you were possibly a bit more reasonable about the whole affair, then maybe you'd win more supporters, rather than your previous posts, which have mainly amounted to : "Socialists can fuck off and die, you're all terrorist Stalinist fascist commies" or whatever.


Expecting reason from Whittier is like expecting snow in the Sahara. Lying, delusion and accusations of anti-americanism are all part of the Whittier package. He's even claimed to have been in the military before. Not that he could ever prove it of course. I would treat him as someone with severe retardation of mental ability unless he proves otherwise.

Not that I ever expect him to of course. I suspect his real world name is Pat Robertson.

He's even claimed to have been in the military before.

Is he still claiming to be in the military or not?

Whittier, are you now or have you ever been in the employ of the US military?

Fat chance of that. In places like Cuba, even criticizing the government can get you thrown in jail. You really think people are going to tell how they really feel?

According to the people who have actually been there as witnesses, rather than propoganda at the governmental level, you're wrong about that.

Nope.
surely you would do it for the poor oppressed people of Venezuela?

Is he still claiming to be in the military or not?

Not recently if that's what you mean. At the time of his claim, over a year now I think, I challenged him to prove his statements or face being titled as a delusional crackpot. His response was that I was a "typical pot smoking hippy". I just put him on the mental scale of a 1 year old.

Is he still claiming to be in the military or not?

Whittier, are you now or have you ever been in the employ of the US military?
ooh. Do you want to see a picture?

surely you would do it for the poor oppressed people of Venezuela?
Nope.

For starters, I don't believe in any sort of god. In second place, I believe the Venezuelans deserve better, like doing well economically and then vote Chávez out. And thirdly, you lie too much, so I doubt any prayer coming from you would carry much weight with a god, if there was one.

ooh. Do you want to see a picture?

I would prefer a straight answer to the question.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v245/vetobob/whittier.jpg

taken in February of this year. I'm stuck here till November.

Nope.

For starters, I don't believe in any sort of god. In second place, I believe the Venezuelans deserve better, like doing well economically and then vote Chávez out. And thirdly, you lie too much, so I doubt any prayer coming from you would carry much weight with a god, if there was one.
then why does he answer them then?

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v245/vetobob/whittier.jpg

taken in February of this year. I'm stuck here till November.

That's confirmation if I've ever seen it.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v245/vetobob/whittier.jpg

taken in February of this year. I'm stuck here till November.

And what the hell is this supposed to prove? I see a soldier with no identifying features. For all I know, you could have just lifted it off google somewhere. Hell, he doesn't even look like a soldier. That uniform is the sloppiest I've ever seen. It looks like someone just slapped on a tan shirt on slacks and got a plastic rifle to go. It also lacks a pack of any sorts that soldiers carry their gear in. It's about as fake as you are Whittier. You'll need better than that.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v245/vetobob/whittier.jpg

taken in February of this year. I'm stuck here till November.

Is that meant to be you, Mr Canales?

then why does he answer them then?
He doesn't. Venezuela hasn't collapsed yet, however Chávez's economic conduct would make it rather easy for that to happen. That doesn't need god's intervention.

He doesn't. Venezuela hasn't collapsed yet, however Chávez's economic conduct would make it rather easy for that to happen. That doesn't need god's intervention.

Oh, you haven't heard about my other prayers he has answered? Like the one where I prayed for some dude to get into a really horrible car accident and end up marrying some really really really overweight b**** that had 15 kids from some other guy. Just so his girlfriend at the time would be free for me. And you know what? It happened exactly like that an hour after I prayed it.

Oh, you haven't heard about my other prayers he has answered? Like the one where I prayed for some dude to get into a really horrible car accident and end up marrying some really really really overweight b**** that had 15 kids from some other guy. Just so his girlfriend at the time would be free for me. And you know what? It happened exactly like that an hour after I prayed it.

The fellow was in a really horrible car crash and was married within an hour of your prayer?

EDIT: surely if it was God's will then the term 'accident' is inappropriate?

Valdania - Rummie's a fool, though.

Eh? I know that already.

Oh, you haven't heard about my other prayers he has answered? Like the one where I prayed for some dude to get into a really horrible car accident and end up marrying some really really really overweight b**** that had 15 kids from some other guy. Just so his girlfriend at the time would be free for me. And you know what? It happened exactly like that an hour after I prayed it.

All this proves to me is that you're:

1: Just a troll looking for attention
2: You're a sick bastard whose definition of god is "My personal bitch",
3: A delusional person with limited mental faculties.

Or....

A criminal who attempted homicide and is using "religious" claims to justify it.

Besides, you've got no proof of what you said. Just like that photo of yours isn't proof of diddly squat. I could make a lot of spurious claims too. Like for example.

I prayed to the Flying Spaghetti Monster to smack down the US and 5 minutes later, the twin towers had big holes in them courtesy of hijackers.

I prayed that to his noodliness that Bush would be forever mentally retarded due to his coke snorting so that he would never get a speech right. And guess what? His noodliness responded.

Ain't spurious claims fun?

All this proves to me is that you're:

1: Just a troll looking for attention
2: You're a sick bastard whose definition of god is "My personal bitch",
3: A delusional person with limited mental faculties.

Or....

A criminal who attempted homicide and is using "religious" claims to justify it.

Besides, you've got no proof of what you said. Just like that photo of yours isn't proof of diddly squat. I could make a lot of spurious claims too. Like for example.

I prayed to the Flying Spaghetti Monster to smack down the US and 5 minutes later, the twin towers had big holes in them courtesy of hijackers.

I prayed that to his noodliness that Bush would be forever mentally retarded due to his coke snorting so that he would never get a speech right. And guess what? His noodliness responded.

Ain't spurious claims fun?

Hey, its not illegal to pray for someone to die horribly. If you pray for it, and it happens, there nothing anyone can do about it because, well, the secular state does not accept that religious acts like praying for someone's death, can actually result in that person's death.
Besides, I was nowhere near the scene.


That photo is proof I'm in the military in Iraq.

And what the hell is this supposed to prove? I see a soldier with no identifying features. For all I know, you could have just lifted it off google somewhere. Hell, he doesn't even look like a soldier. That uniform is the sloppiest I've ever seen. It looks like someone just slapped on a tan shirt on slacks and got a plastic rifle to go. It also lacks a pack of any sorts that soldiers carry their gear in. It's about as fake as you are Whittier. You'll need better than that.
It would be considering I am in Iraq and there are no laundering facilities around. Not to mention that it is illegal to press the ACUs.
The pack you refer to is more properly called a ruck sack. We don't carry those everywhere. Just on overnight missions, a long with a sleeping bag.

The only thing fake about it is that I am holding the weapon in my right hand which I am not used to as I am left handed and naturally fire with my left hand. But my NCO had me pose that way for the photo cause it was supposed to look better. Tan shirt? You can see that through the coat? The rifle itself is very much real and had live rounds in it. Just blow up the photo.

Is that meant to be you, Mr Canales?
that IS me. Just ask the mods. they got that IP check thing where they can tell where in the world a person is logged in from. Just like they keep records of every thing.

that IS me. Just ask the mods. they got that IP check thing where they can tell where in the world a person is logged in from. Just like they keep records of every thing.

So you are the same person who wrote these words:

With a heart and a self restraint that is the envy of every saint he can easily work a miracle or two. In love and desire the ways of the flesh should offer no allure to him. But where in this nation or in the world can you find a man who is so untouched and pure?
Again I say to you, look no further. The man in whome these qualities bloom is me. I have never strayed from all I believe. God has given me an iron will. If I was the partner of Eve we would all still be in Paradise.

...and yet pray for the suffering of your fellow man? Do the words 'thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself' ring any bells?

What the hell does all this have to do with Chavez?

I'll never understand how you crazy yanks can talk so much shit about countries you've never seen and never met people from...all the while complaining about 'propaganda' while never questioning the propaganda you've been raised on.


Assuming alot from someone that barely gets off the res.

Oh, you haven't heard about my other prayers he has answered? Like the one where I prayed for some dude to get into a really horrible car accident and end up marrying some really really really overweight b**** that had 15 kids from some other guy. Just so his girlfriend at the time would be free for me. And you know what? It happened exactly like that an hour after I prayed it.
It would appear that your prayers were intercepted by Satan? It would appear that your soul, for lack of a better word, is now owned by him?

Hey, its not illegal to pray for someone to die horribly. If you pray for it, and it happens, there nothing anyone can do about it because, well, the secular state does not accept that religious acts like praying for someone's death, can actually result in that person's death.

No, it's not illegal to pray for someone to die horribly. But to do so and then claim the event was a direct result of that means that either you're sick in the head or the event never happened and you're delusional.

You're either scum who wants to see people suffer for personal gain or deluded.


That photo is proof I'm in the military in Iraq.

Your 'photo' appears to indicate that the person there is wearing just a long sleeved shirt and slacks and nothing resembling body armor. Furthermore, that rifle does not appear to be of any carbine or assault rifle currently in active use among the US forces. The closest thing it bears resemblance to, and that is a stretch, is a M16A1 with a 20 round clip. An archaic weapon that by Vietnam's standards, was a piece of shit in dirty environments.

Like I said. That photo is NOT proof. There is nothing in that photo that is personally identifiable. It just indicates just another faceless, and I do mean it literally, grunt.

Furthermore, using the mods as a defence is worthless. IPs don't get given out by the mods on request. You want to prove you're what you say you are, YOU have to provide that information. Eut has his service number, rank and unit which can be double checked. Where's yours?

EDIT: Additionally, the US military does NOT like it's networks being used for web surfing places like nationstates IIRC. So what you're saying about the IP being checked is nothing more than just another bunch of bullshit.

Eut has his service number, rank and unit which can be double checked. Where's yours?

Given that we already know your full name, and the biography of your life up to about the year 2000, such additional information could hardly be harmful to disclose.

Given that we already know your full name, and the biography of your life up to about the year 2000, such additional information could hardly be harmful to disclose.

Since when did Whittier disclose his full name and biography?

Since when did Whittier disclose his full name and biography?

Just do a google search on 'vetobob'.

Just do a google search on 'vetobob'.

Did that. Did you mean Robert Canales? The guy sounds every much an ass as Whittier does.

Did that. Did you mean Robert Canales? The guy sounds every much an ass as Whittier does.

http://forums2.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=10859458&postcount=431

Just do a google search on 'vetobob'.
The thought plickens!! :D

Did that. Did you mean Robert Canales? The guy sounds every much an ass as Whittier does.
Well, he did run for Congress.

This thread should be retitled:

All About Bob!! :p

This thread should be retitled:

All About Bob!! :p
Only if the "Bob" we find out all about in the thread is Bob Dobbs.

Deal?

So you are the same person who wrote these words:

With a heart and a self restraint that is the envy of every saint he can easily work a miracle or two. In love and desire the ways of the flesh should offer no allure to him. But where in this nation or in the world can you find a man who is so untouched and pure?
Again I say to you, look no further. The man in whome these qualities bloom is me. I have never strayed from all I believe. God has given me an iron will. If I was the partner of Eve we would all still be in Paradise.

...and yet pray for the suffering of your fellow man? Do the words 'thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself' ring any bells?

where did you find that?

No, it's not illegal to pray for someone to die horribly. But to do so and then claim the event was a direct result of that means that either you're sick in the head or the event never happened and you're delusional.

You're either scum who wants to see people suffer for personal gain or deluded.



Your 'photo' appears to indicate that the person there is wearing just a long sleeved shirt and slacks and nothing resembling body armor. Furthermore, that rifle does not appear to be of any carbine or assault rifle currently in active use among the US forces. The closest thing it bears resemblance to, and that is a stretch, is a M16A1 with a 20 round clip. An archaic weapon that by Vietnam's standards, was a piece of shit in dirty environments.

Like I said. That photo is NOT proof. There is nothing in that photo that is personally identifiable. It just indicates just another faceless, and I do mean it literally, grunt.

Furthermore, using the mods as a defence is worthless. IPs don't get given out by the mods on request. You want to prove you're what you say you are, YOU have to provide that information. Eut has his service number, rank and unit which can be double checked. Where's yours?

EDIT: Additionally, the US military does NOT like it's networks being used for web surfing places like nationstates IIRC. So what you're saying about the IP being checked is nothing more than just another bunch of bullshit.
1. No. I'm just vengeful. I hold grudges.

2. The point isn't that they would give out the IP but be able to verify I am where I say I am.

3. That information is private, to give it out would be to make it vulnerable to theft by identity theives. No one should give out that info about themselves to strangers.

4. The slacks and long sleeve shirt you refer to are the new uniform of the US army. I don't remember if I was wearing the new body armor in that one. But I do have close up shots.

5. Those weren't 20 round mags, they were 30 round mags filled with live ammo.

6. You are assuming that I'm on one of the military networks. Bad assumption. If it were true, I would not be posting here cause, as I found out in Kuwait, the jolt forums are actually blocked on military networks and there is no way to access them. Interestingly, the game engine itself was not blocked but the forums were. See not all networks in Iraq belong to the military.
You are trying to sound like you know what you are saying but I think I can prove that in this case you are talking out your rear.

Given that we already know your full name, and the biography of your life up to about the year 2000, such additional information could hardly be harmful to disclose.
? Where did you get that info from?

If you are relying on my campaign site for the biography, its not really a complete biography. Just highlights.

I would disclose it to you but you would have to promise to never ever under any circumstances disclose it to anyone else.
I have political enemies who would love to get their hands on it for diabolical reasons.

Oh, you haven't heard about my other prayers he has answered? Like the one where I prayed for some dude to get into a really horrible car accident and end up marrying some really really really overweight b**** that had 15 kids from some other guy. Just so his girlfriend at the time would be free for me. And you know what? It happened exactly like that an hour after I prayed it.
That was a quick marriage. Did I tell you I play poker with God every Tuesday and he's personally told me "Nah, I don't answer stupid prayers", when I asked him what kind of prayer were those he said "all of them."

He's fun like that.

I wrote this really cool poem. Its called Shut The Fuck Up.

Shut The Fuck Up

Shut The Fuck Up
Time To Show Proper Respect
God's Gift To Women is in the house
Back the fuck up 12 feet out of my personal space
I'm completely invulnerable
With a charm
No woman can resist
Shut The Fuck Up
You don't know me
But I'm about to school you.

Whether lovin' or fighten,
It's always to my benefit
You better back the fuck up
This is a battle anthem
Fuck the west coast
Like a broken record
they repeat the same idiotic shit
My defense is dominated by offense
that's an offense
Don't talk to me about tact
Shut The Fuck Up
Whiny Calis better get their reinforcements
Cause they about to get their asses whooped
Unlike Survivor
when people cross me
there are no survivors
Double talkers walk away with fat lips
I'm about to put you in the obituary
Shut The Fuck Up
Like X Ray Vision
The Greatness of Me
Sees through your fake cliches
You took your best shot
And I'm still talking shit to your face



Shut The Fuck Up
Show proper respect
God's Gift To Women is in the House
You better back the fuck up
12 feet out of my personal space
I'm completely invulnerable
With a charm
No woman can resist
Shut the fuck up
You don't know me
But I'm about to school you
Shut The Fuck Up

The New world order about to be taken over
by Roberts World Order
Lame Californians dominated by stereotypical images
Greatest fraud was the California census
I know not fear
Without morals
Are the Southern Cal guttersluts
All they do
is lie, steal and kill
East Coasters all talk
like a bunch of old people
All their rhetoric
they stole from the dinosaurs
Fiance stealers are the worst scum
on the earth
Check it out
I'm here to show them
their proper place
Shut The Fuck Up
Show Proper Respect
I kill 2 birds with one stone
Prepare for warfare
Check yourself
Talking about me
Makes you a dead man walking
I beat you, bury you,
Then I take your woman
Just for spite
Shut The Fuck Up
Show proper respect
God's Gift To Women Is In The House
The crowd ain't got no comebacks



Shut The Fuck Up
Time to show proper respect
God's Gift To Women is in the house
Back the fuck up 12 feet out of my personal space
I'm completely invulnerable
With a charm
No woman can resist
Shut The Fuck Up
You don't know me
But I'm about to school you.

You don't know me
I'm about to make you
Shut the fuck up

You got a problem
My two fists are problem solvers
Shut The Fuck Up
Republicans can kiss my ass
Democrats can suck my dick
Shut The Fuck Up
Fuck the Police
People are getting creamed
while police are eating
Krispy Kream
Every fight I've been in
I've won
You don't know
You'll be
another statistic
Shut The Fuck Up
Bitches beware
I got balls of brass
Girls who play mind games
end up with
broken minds
in the asylum
Shut The Fuck Up
Show Proper Respect
God's Gift To Women
Is In Tha House
I'm invulnerable
with a charm
no woman can resist
You don't know me
But I Just Pawned You

This beauty came from a blog run by Robert under the name vetobob, so I assume it is our precious Mr. Canales.

Tell me, do they allow 12 year olds to serve in the US Armed Forces? Maybe Rumsfeld read that Robert's "two fists are problem solvers" and decided to make an exemption.

This beauty came from a blog run by Robert under the name vetobob, so I assume it is our precious Mr. Canales.

Tell me, do they allow 12 year olds to serve in the US Armed Forces? Maybe Rumsfeld read that Robert's "two fists are problem solvers" and decided to make an exemption.

I see you didn't like the poem. That's ok. But I wouldn't have qouted the whole thing.
Actually I wouldn't have put it here at all cause its inciteful and is likely to give people here ill feelings. If I or someone else just willy nilly had posted that here, it would be flaming or maybe trolling. People would take it out of context and get all mad. I don't know that is in your case though cause you just citing something from another site.

I see you didn't like the poem. That's ok. But I wouldn't have qouted the whole thing.
Actually I wouldn't have put it here at all cause its inciteful and is likely to give people here ill feelings. If I or someone else just willy nilly had posted that here, it would be flaming or maybe trolling. People would take it out of context and get all mad. I don't know that is in your case though cause you just citing something from another site.

I didn't take it out of context, that was the whole post on the blog.

If I would have posted it in this manner, it would have been taken out of context:

Shut The Fuck Up
Time To Show Proper Respect Women
I'm completely invulnerable...
No woman can resist
Cause they about to get their asses whooped
My two fists are problem solvers
Bitches beware

I brought it up, not to incite, but to enlighten, so that we may get one step closer to answering the age-old question: "Just who is Whittier--?"

I didn't take it out of context, that was the whole post on the blog.

If I would have posted it in this manner, it would have been taken out of context:



I brought it up, not to incite, but to enlighten, so that we may get one step closer to answering the age-old question: "Just who is Whittier--?"

I see. But like AB said earlier, this really departs from the thread topic. May I suggest a seperate thread and we can ask the mods to move all these "whose Whittier" posts from here to there?


I was not saying you were taking it out of context, I just saying someone would. It always happens in this general forum.

If you qouted it like that, my experience with the mods would say that it would probably be flamebaiting.

If not for the comment, I know that copy pasting a poem or song would be considred spammish. Again, personal experience.

I thought foul language wasn't allowed here. Cause that's what I thought I was getting deleted and forum banned for all those other times.

I didn't take it out of context, that was the whole post on the blog.

If I would have posted it in this manner, it would have been taken out of context:

I brought it up, not to incite, but to enlighten, so that we may get one step closer to answering the age-old question: "Just who is Whittier--?"
He briefly attended California High School in East Whittier and graduated from Whittier High School in 1992.......

After he graduated from Whittier, he enlisted in the Army for a very breif period. After serving for only five months, he was given an uncharacterized discharge.

Unless Whittier re-enlisted, he hasn't been active since around 1992-3?

where did you find that?

Either:

http://maxpages.com/constitution/Vetobob_to_run_for_US_Congress

or in the Bible, depending upon to which quotation you were refering.

Either:

http://maxpages.com/constitution/Vetobob_to_run_for_US_Congress

or in the Bible, depending upon to which quotation you were refering.
Why don't you just give him a call and ask him in person?

1. No. I'm just vengeful. I hold grudges.

Vengeful scum then. You wanted another to suffer so you could gain. You're still scum.


2. The point isn't that they would give out the IP but be able to verify I am where I say I am.

And if you could talk to god, he'd tell you I'm his personal agent in charge of vetting who goes to hell before they even get to the pearly gates. Guess where you're going? I'll give you a hint. It's somewhere hot.


3. That information is private, to give it out would be to make it vulnerable to theft by identity theives. No one should give out that info about themselves to strangers.

Eut certainly doesn't have a problem with it. Why do you? Maybe you just don't have any proof at all? That's how it works here. No proof, no credibility.


4. The slacks and long sleeve shirt you refer to are the new uniform of the US army. I don't remember if I was wearing the new body armor in that one. But I do have close up shots.

Do it. Give us that close up shot. And if you can, see if you can get your name tag on the uniform in the picture. But you probably won't. Your picture proves nothing regarding it being you. I could say this person is me, but that doesn't make it so either.

http://img81.imageshack.us/img81/7620/fidelcastro1xo.jpg

I'd need more than that to prove it. And so would you.


5. Those weren't 20 round mags, they were 30 round mags filled with live ammo.

Your picture shows a straight clip and not a curved one. Straight clips on the M16 were 20 round holders.


6. You are assuming that I'm on one of the military networks. Bad assumption.


Of course not. I'm assuming you're posting either from a home computer or a cybercafe. Why? Because I still think you're lying about your military service and that you're just a poser.


You are trying to sound like you know what you are saying but I think I can prove that in this case you are talking out your rear.

When it comes to talking out of one's rear Whittier, I leave that to masters like you.

Your picture shows a straight clip and not a curved one. Straight clips on the M16 were 20 round holders.

30 round mags aren't that curved.

Magazines (http://i15.photobucket.com/albums/a353/tuebor/CIMG0521.jpg)

The uniform is the new ACU and the guy is carrying what looks to be an M16A2 or an M16A4. However, that picture looks like one that was in a Yahoo news article or something.

According to the US Army email system (Army Knowledge Online) there are 2 Robert Canales, a SPC Canales in the RA, and a PV2 Canales in the California National Guard. However, if our Mr. Canales were a PV2 in the Guard at his age, that would bring up some warning flags.

I see. But like AB said earlier, this really departs from the thread topic. May I suggest a seperate thread and we can ask the mods to move all these "whose Whittier" posts from here to there?

Don't mind me. This is beginning to be quite amusing.

Why don't you just give him a call and ask him in person?

What and engage in human-to-human contact with another, unmediated by the internet?

*shudder*

I have my limits.

What and engage in human-to-human contact with another, unmediated by the internet?

*shudder*

I have my limits.
Can't say that I blame you, especially since it is long distance to Whittier.

Do any of you have any real understanding of Latin America?

What was the situation, politically, economically and socially in Venezuela before Chavez managed to get himself elected? Do you know? It appears that a lot of you assume it was somewhat like the situation in the USA or Western Europe, well it was not.

Effectively Venezuela (and many other Latin American countries as well) was operating a feudal system. A few rich and powerful families controlled all of the economic and political power. (Chavez managed to break these barriers by choosing a military career - the only way it was possible) The land appropriations would not make sense if land distribution was as it is in the Western world, but it was not. One family owned one third of all of the feasably usable land in Venezuela, and most of this was not being used while the majority of the population lived below the poverty line.

My political views are Classic Liberal, laissez faire minimal government, but this position is dependent upon there being opportunity available. All that Chavez is doing (and I dislike his socialist views) is canceling out the effects of centuries of feudalism.

The same pattern can be seen in the Andean nations, and to some extent here in Brazil. So before you start bitching about what he is doing, try understanding the circumstances under which it is being done.


I realize that AB Again wrote this all the way back on p.5, but upon reading it I just had to respond. AB Again, if you read this, then I'd like to say: thank you. This sort of intelligence/common sense is rare this days. My personal view is that people just find it too un-trendy or "wishy-washy" to take a centrist/moderate viewpoint, or even any viewpoint that acknowledges that there are (at least) two sides to every story and that you can't apply one blanket ideology over every situation under the sun.

As a student at Duke (for those unfamiliar, the 5th-ranked academic university in the United States) pursuing dual degrees in Economics and Latin American Studies who also considers himself an advocate of laissez-faire capitalism, I would like to reiterate that the historical situation in most of Latin America is in no way the same as in the U.S. Latin America does, imo, need to transition to capitalism eventually, but as the '90s with their IMF-backed austerity programs showed us, if the transition happens too suddenly the frictional unemployment and poverty will be overwhelming, even perhaps causing a popular backlash against capitalism. After centuries of colonialism, feudalism, and brutal dictatorships, Latin America needs some sort of a buffer as it integrates into the global economic order, and I feel like a heretic for saying it but perhaps moderate social welfare policies (that maybe can be scaled back later) are the way to go.

Chavez, however, is going too far. The Brazilian model is more viable, in my opinion, or the inclusive approach of someone like Costa Rican president-elect Oscar Arias.

30 round mags aren't that curved.

Magazines (http://i15.photobucket.com/albums/a353/tuebor/CIMG0521.jpg)

The uniform is the new ACU and the guy is carrying what looks to be an M16A2 or an M16A4. However, that picture looks like one that was in a Yahoo news article or something.

According to the US Army email system (Army Knowledge Online) there are 2 Robert Canales, a SPC Canales in the RA, and a PV2 Canales in the California National Guard. However, if our Mr. Canales were a PV2 in the Guard at his age, that would bring up some warning flags.
Go with the Spc.

Go with the Spc.

Well, from what I can gather from AKO and Google a SPC Robert Canales is in the 40th Signal Brigade, which is currently stationed in Iraq. (http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1496084/posts)

Also, on his blog Whittier says he lives in Sierra Vista, Arizona, which happens to be right ouside the gates of Fort Huachuca. (http://maps.yahoo.com/maps_result?addr=&csz=sierra+vista%2C+AZ&country=us&new=1&name=&qty=)

Draw your own conclusions from all of that.

The most definite conclusion to be drawn from all of this is that I have far too much time on my hands.

Well, from what I can gather from AKO and Google a SPC Robert Canales is in the 40th Signal Brigade, which is currently stationed in Iraq. (http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1496084/posts)

Also, on his blog Whittier says he lives in Sierra Vista, Arizona, which happens to be right ouside the gates of Fort Huachuca. (http://maps.yahoo.com/maps_result?addr=&csz=sierra+vista%2C+AZ&country=us&new=1&name=&qty=)

Draw your own conclusions from all of that.

The most definite conclusion to be drawn from all of this is that I have far too much time on my hands.
Personally, I think you are in the wrong State. Go with California.

Personally, I think you are in the wrong State. Go with California.

Well, looking at this (http://www.smartvoter.org/2000/03/07/ca/state/race/usrep34/) the Robert Canales who ran for Congress is a Robert Arthur Canales. The SPC Canales whose unit is in Iraq also happens to be a Robert Arthur Canales. Unless both Robert Canales' in the Army have the same middle name, he seems to be the guy.

Well, from what I can gather from AKO and Google a SPC Robert Canales is in the 40th Signal Brigade, which is currently stationed in Iraq. (http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1496084/posts)

Also, on his blog Whittier says he lives in Sierra Vista, Arizona, which happens to be right ouside the gates of Fort Huachuca. (http://maps.yahoo.com/maps_result?addr=&csz=sierra+vista%2C+AZ&country=us&new=1&name=&qty=)

Draw your own conclusions from all of that.

The most definite conclusion to be drawn from all of this is that I have far too much time on my hands.
ha. same here.

Well, looking at this (http://www.smartvoter.org/2000/03/07/ca/state/race/usrep34/) the Robert Canales who ran for Congress is a Robert Arthur Canales.
If you look at the address of this one, it is Whittier, California and the email address (vetobob) is the same as the nick on the weblog (http://robertsworldview.blogspot.com/2005_05_01_robertsworldview_archive.html) (vetobob).

The SPC Canales whose unit is in Iraq also happens to be a Robert Arthur Canales. Unless both Robert Canales' in the Army have the same middle name, he seems to be the guy.
Perhaps were are looking at the same guy in any case? Even the ages are the same.

If you look at the address of this one, it is Whittier, California and the email address (vetobob) is the same as the nick on the weblog (http://robertsworldview.blogspot.com/2005_05_01_robertsworldview_archive.html) (vetobob).


Perhaps were are looking at the same guy in any case? Even the ages are the same.
I thought it said Sierra Vista Arizona.

This beauty came from a blog run by Robert under the name vetobob, so I assume it is our precious Mr. Canales.

Tell me, do they allow 12 year olds to serve in the US Armed Forces? Maybe Rumsfeld read that Robert's "two fists are problem solvers" and decided to make an exemption.

Wow. I'm shocked. How does that post jive with a post that says he is pure and had he been in the garden with Eve they would still be there? I was referred here by Whittier, himself, and I have to say I just find the information you are providing about him confusing. THe things I see here do not jive with the person he has presented in discussion with me.

Wow. I'm shocked. How does that post jive with a post that says he is pure and had he been in the garden with Eve they would still be there? I was referred here by Whittier, himself, and I have to say I just find the information you are providing about him confusing. THe things I see here do not jive with the person he has presented in discussion with me.
where do you guys keep getting that garden of eve stuff?

where do you guys keep getting that garden of eve stuff?

I just saw it here. If you didn't write it then, I'll leave it alone. I didn't see it on your blog. However, the poem doesn't jive with a guy that claims to be pure. That poem is a bit vile and quite violent. I don't know how punching people in the face for saying the wrong thing jives with being a good Christian with you, but it feels wrong to me. Not that you have those urges, but that you seem to proudly proclaim them as if violence in the face of dissent is appropriate in your eyes.

History is full of guys who started out as paragons of the Left or Right, and eventually changed their titles to "Ruler Forever" in the name of defending whatever particular revolution they rode in on.

Chavez is not a threat to anyone except some Venezuelans, and the US isn't even remotely close to attacking Venezuela, no matter how many times Chavez talks about it on the radio.

Eventually, the locals will either get tired of him and replace him, the good old fashioned way, or they will put up with him until he dies of old age. In either case, it won't make a bit of difference to the outside world.

Hey everyone - here's a picture of me doing my service!

I'm stuck in *somewhere classified* until a while away. I have to man this machinegun for a week at a time. It's quite sad, because my contact lense sometimes falls out, and then some insurgents might attack when I'm not looking.

But anyway, as you can see, this is me.

http://images.theglobeandmail.com/archives/RTGAM/images/20030322/wmain0322/1britishtroops.jpg

P.S. I was on the news, so this is actually me, with a camera near me. But still me.

Because you can start service at sixteen in the UK and they shipped me out pretty sharpish.

I just saw it here. If you didn't write it then, I'll leave it alone. I didn't see it on your blog. However, the poem doesn't jive with a guy that claims to be pure. That poem is a bit vile and quite violent. I don't know how punching people in the face for saying the wrong thing jives with being a good Christian with you, but it feels wrong to me. Not that you have those urges, but that you seem to proudly proclaim them as if violence in the face of dissent is appropriate in your eyes.
I remember writing it, but I don't remember putting it on the web so I am trying to figure out they got a hold of it.

The poem is actually just that, a poem. Nothing more.
It is even says so on the blog.

If I wrote it into an essay or some such, then it would have greater meaning.
But as is, it's just a play on words. Some people think a bad play on words. Some people think pretty good.

Hey everyone - here's a picture of me doing my service!

I'm stuck in *somewhere classified* until a while away. I have to man this machinegun for a week at a time. It's quite sad, because my contact lense sometimes falls out, and then some insurgents might attack when I'm not looking.

But anyway, as you can see, this is me.

http://images.theglobeandmail.com/archives/RTGAM/images/20030322/wmain0322/1britishtroops.jpg

P.S. I was on the news, so this is actually me, with a camera near me. But still me.

Because you can start service at sixteen in the UK and they shipped me out pretty sharpish.
lol
Do they have serial numbers in the UK army?

I remember writing it, but I don't remember putting it on the web so I am trying to figure out they got a hold of it.

The poem is actually just that, a poem. Nothing more.
It is even says so on the blog.

If I wrote it into an essay or some such, then it would have greater meaning.
But as is, it's just a play on words. Some people think a bad play on words. Some people think pretty good.

You stil wrote it. If I wrote a poem glorifying rape, could I claim it's just a poem? You glorify being the aggressor in violence in a poem while at the same time claiming if you had been Adam, we'd still be in Eden. That's a bold claim for someone who writes a poem like that.

@ Whittier---

I'm in the TA, I wouldn't have a clue as it's not the official army.

But we do have cereal numbers. Like if we're about to attack an area with a lot of cornfields, we say "1" a lot in the radio (as corn fields can hide enemy attackers).

This is compared, to say, "3" for oat fields. Oats are good, as we can loot them and make tasty flapjack when we get back to base, so a "3" over the radio helps the lads and ladies to relax.

*snip*

From what I can gather, using the US Army email system and google, Whittier seems to be a SPC Robert Arthur Canales. This seems to be the same Robert Arthur Canales who ran for Congress at one point, as there are only 2 Robert Canales' in the Army, and it would be very strange if they were both Robert Arthur Canales. Only SPC Canales has his middle name on AKO. This SPC Canales has "A Co 40th Sig" as his unit, and that unit happens to be in Iraq. His blog has the town right outside Fort Huachuca (the home station of 40th Sig) as his residence. This SPC Canales is still on active duty, as it would said Army Reserve if he were on IRR, which is what I am.

Although it is quite possible that he's on the rear detachment for his unit at Fort Huachuca, it's also possible that he's in Iraq with the 40th Sig. It's also possible that he's moved on to a different unit, but just didn't change it on AKO (the Army email system). However, the evidence seems to point to him indeed being in Iraq with the 40th Signal.

Note that I don't care much for Whittier's political views, but he does seem to be what he says he is. Although if he's a SPC he must have only joined within the last 3-4 years or so. If you don't make SGT within 5 years something is amiss.

From what I can gather, using the US Army email system and google, Whittier seems to be a SPC Robert Arthur Canales. This seems to be the same Robert Arthur Canales who ran for Congress at one point, as there are only 2 Robert Canales' in the Army, and it would be very strange if they were both Robert Arthur Canales. Only SPC Canales has his middle name on AKO. This SPC Canales has "A Co 40th Sig" as his unit, and that unit happens to be in Iraq. His blog has the town right outside Fort Huachuca (the home station of 40th Sig) as his residence. This SPC Canales is still on active duty, as it would said Army Reserve if he were on IRR, which is what I am.

Although it is quite possible that he's on the rear detachment for his unit at Fort Huachuca, it's also possible that he's in Iraq with the 40th Sig. It's also possible that he's moved on to a different unit, but just didn't change it on AKO (the Army email system). However, the evidence seems to point to him indeed being in Iraq with the 40th Signal.

Note that I don't care much for Whittier's political views, but he does seem to be what he says he is. Although if he's a SPC he must have only joined within the last 3-4 years or so. If you don't make SGT within 5 years something is amiss.

For the record, I made SGT in three in the USMC *winks*

You stil wrote it. If I wrote a poem glorifying rape, could I claim it's just a poem? You glorify being the aggressor in violence in a poem while at the same time claiming if you had been Adam, we'd still be in Eden. That's a bold claim for someone who writes a poem like that.
If the person who mentioned the garden of eden poem, would provide the link where they found it, you might find there is some arrogance and aggression in it too.

where do you guys keep getting that garden of eve stuff?

Don't play dumb.

http://maxpages.com/constitution/Vetobob_to_run_for_US_Congress

Robert Canales announces his candidacy for the 34th Congressional District

...Now I must ask you where in the can you find a man so extroardinaire. Look no further. The man in whome these qualities dwell is me.
In love and romance a Congressman should be unimpeachable and his heart and mind as pure as the morning dew. With a heart and a self restraint that is the envy of every saint he can easily work a miracle or two. In love and desire the ways of the flesh should offer no allure to him. But where in this nation or in the world can you find a man who is so untouched and pure?
Again I say to you, look no further. The man in whome these qualities bloom is me. I have never strayed from all I believe. God has given me an iron will. If I was the partner of Eve we would all still be in Paradise. And today I offer my services to my community and my nation as their next Representative in the US Congress. God bless America.

@ Whittier---

I'm in the TA, I wouldn't have a clue as it's not the official army.

But we do have cereal numbers. Like if we're about to attack an area with a lot of cornfields, we say "1" a lot in the radio (as corn fields can hide enemy attackers).

This is compared, to say, "3" for oat fields. Oats are good, as we can loot them and make tasty flapjack when we get back to base, so a "3" over the radio helps the lads and ladies to relax.
TA?

TA?

Territorial Army. It's like a reserve force, you can do anywhere from 12 days (in some bits of it, like cooks or medics) up to about 4 months, if you're that way inclined.

There's also a TA SAS, which the officers of the SAS now need to have been in.

If the person who mentioned the garden of eden poem, would provide the link where they found it, you might find there is some arrogance and aggression in it too.

I see arrogance, but not agression, but the colors on that site are so horrendous I have a hard time reading it so I didn't read all of it. Honestly, how do you jive such behavior with that of a Christian? How can you proudly advocate aggressive violence?

From what I can gather, using the US Army email system and google, Whittier seems to be a SPC Robert Arthur Canales. This seems to be the same Robert Arthur Canales who ran for Congress at one point, as there are only 2 Robert Canales' in the Army, and it would be very strange if they were both Robert Arthur Canales. Only SPC Canales has his middle name on AKO. This SPC Canales has "A Co 40th Sig" as his unit, and that unit happens to be in Iraq. His blog has the town right outside Fort Huachuca (the home station of 40th Sig) as his residence. This SPC Canales is still on active duty, as it would said Army Reserve if he were on IRR, which is what I am.

Although it is quite possible that he's on the rear detachment for his unit at Fort Huachuca, it's also possible that he's in Iraq with the 40th Sig. It's also possible that he's moved on to a different unit, but just didn't change it on AKO (the Army email system). However, the evidence seems to point to him indeed being in Iraq with the 40th Signal.

Note that I don't care much for Whittier's political views, but he does seem to be what he says he is. Although if he's a SPC he must have only joined within the last 3-4 years or so. If you don't make SGT within 5 years something is amiss.
Truly. My roommate was a spc for ten years and always whining that he was never promoted.
I'm under pressure to get promoted even though, at the moment, I have no plans to reenlist and I'm planning on getting out when I getting back. What is the point of being promoted if you're not going to stay in? Know what I mean?

If the person who mentioned the garden of eden poem, would provide the link where they found it, you might find there is some arrogance and aggression in it too.

It wasn't a poem. It was prose. Since you "wrote it into an essay or some such," then it must "have greater meaning."

(Not that I buy your "it's justa poem excuse)

I will agree with you that their is plenty of Anger and Pride (deadly sins) in your poems and prose.

Also, what's your problem with Kosovars?

They're people too, remember, just as much as the Native Americans. Oh and it's "whom", not "whome". And the colour scheme nearly gave me some kind of fit, too.

I see arrogance, but not agression, but the colors on that site are so horrendous I have a hard time reading it so I didn't read all of it. Honestly, how do you jive such behavior with that of a Christian? How can you proudly advocate aggressive violence?
Things changed since then. Especially when I got compared to the little orphan boy Oliver, saying "Please sir, I want some more".

Also, what's your problem with Kosovars?

They're people too, remember, just as much as the Native Americans. Oh and it's "whom", not "whome". And the colour scheme nearly gave me some kind of fit, too.
Kosovars?

I see arrogance, but not agression, but the colors on that site are so horrendous I have a hard time reading it so I didn't read all of it. Honestly, how do you jive such behavior with that of a Christian? How can you proudly advocate aggressive violence?
Even I have problems sometimes with the colorscheme. I haven't logged into that website since like about 4 and a half years just about.

I just copypasted that speech to put here to make it more readable.


"My fellow Americans, good evening. Tonight we stand at the beginning of a new millenium. With the coming of this new millenium our people have high hopes. Hopes of world peace. Hopes for greater respect for our planet. Hopes for less violence in our schools. And Hopes for a more tolerant society.
At the same time, we face many problems. At this critical time, our nation lacks leadership. Due to the failure of impeachment, we now lack a moral compass as evidenced by children killing and raping children. According to a recent federal report, cases of child molesting are up 130%. In fact, there are several child molesters who have recently been relocated by the state of California to the Whittier area. We currently live in a dual standard society where the President can break the law destroy this nation's national security and get away with without any punishment whatever while, here in California, we just had a young girl, graduating this year from high school at the top of her class and having been named valedictorian, who was expelled from school and jailed for engaging in premarital sex and getting pregnant. We live in a nation where all of us accept some of the responsibility for the current cycle of school violence, except for those we send to Washington who just stand around pointing their fingers, scapegoating parents, schools, gun makers, teens, Hollywood, the networks, radio talk show hosts, everyone but themselves. When was the last we saw their fingers point inward. We have a President who supports the right of morally deprived women to murder children just as they emerge from their mother's wombs. Three times President William Jefferson Clinton has vetoed the ban on partial birth abortion. Because of this irrational behavior on his part, it should be no surprise when he deliberately had US troops target civilians in Yugoslavia resulting in the massacre of thousands of children. President Clinton is just as much a war criminal as Slobadon Milosivich. The only proper place for him as soon as his term expires is behind bars.
On the brighter side, we also face many advances in technology and medicine. A cure for cancer, a cure for paraysis, epilepsy, and other diseases of the central nervous system. Physicists recently teleported an atom from one laboratory to another and are working on repeating this major breakthrough. Astronomers are making new discoveries in leaps and bounds despite the efforts by President Clinton and the Democratic members of Congress to shut down NASA and the Center for Disease Control. A paranoid Congress banned research into human cloning at the insistence of paranoid lobbyists. This ignorant ban is based on arguments from the dard ages such as that all clones will demonic tyrants with glowing red eyes.
We recently bombed Yugoslavia for its policies on race relations and for letting ethnic Albanians starve while here at home, we just had young girl shot in her car by police because she was black. We have hundreds of Native Americans on reservations starving while we send all of our extra food and clothing to the Kosovar refugees. President Clinton left these first Americans out of his economic and social improvement policies. Even in the area of disaster relief, the Native Americans are being left out. Out the money Clinton promised to Oklahoma for rebuilding in the wake of the recent tornadoes, the Native Americans on the reservations there will not see a dime of it. While we send food and clothing to the Kosovar refugees, the Native Americans here in the United States are starving and freezing to death. When was the last you heard some one go on TV and ask to help this group? The schools on the reservations are the dilapidated in the nation, yet again the Native Americans are being left out of the education improvement legislation pouring out of Washington and Sacramento. What about the people just south of the border in Mexico? If any of you have ever been just a quarter of a mile south of the border you have seen whole families literally living in cardboard shacks located in the middle of city landfills. You gave food and clothing to the Kosovars but what have you done for the Native Americans, the poor people of Mexico, or even our nations homeless. Ponder this, what have you done for them. When have you seen Bill Clinton, Representative Grace Napolitano, Governor Gray Davis, or any other Democrat ask you to help them.
We are bombing Yugoslavia for police brutality while here at home we had recent Haitian immigrant unjustly beaten and sodomized by the New York City Police Department. In the city of Whittier in California we had another man who beaten by police just because of his physical appearance. In Riverside, American police officers deliberately used excessive force and the Riverside City Council and the US Attorney General are helping them cover it up.
Our nation talks peace and international goodwill and then turns around and bombs embassies like a terrorist and violates other nations soveriegnty bombing refugee columns just like Saddam Hussein of Iraq did during Desert Storm. The majority of military and diplomatic experts around the world are in agreement that the US is breaking international law. The case of Yugoslavia was a clear case of Bill Clinton, the Democrats, and NATO verses the world. While the Democrats decried the use of weapons destruction during Vietnam, they applauded Clinton's use of these same weapons in Kosovo. They went so far as to use the illegal cluster bombs banned by President Carter in late 70's.
Most Americans feel our nation has gone over the edge. We have a state government that blames christians and republicans for all of societies evils while declaring democrats to be sacred cows. Governor Davis has gone so far as to ask a democrat controlled legislature to ban homeschooling to force Christians to send their children to public schools where their beliefs will be derided. He is also working to ban public prayer. The Democrats recently introduced legilation to allow the state to censure what pastors preach about in their sermons on Sunday. Among the topics that would be banned from being mentioned in the pulpit are abortion, homosexuality, the immoral acts of the President, and family values.
Our nation and our community need a leader with strong moral convictions. Someone who is not afraid to defend rigth from wrong even when everyone else in society adamantly opposes the concept that morality matters. We currently have no Presidential candidates whether Democrat or Republican who are capable or willing to provide the needed moral leadership. Therefore this leadership must come the Congress of the United States. We need a Congressman who will not only be great moral leader, but who is also open minded and willing to encourage our people on the greater advances technologically, medically, scientifically, and in our relationships with each other. The greatest leaders of our nation were not only great politicians and war heroes, they were also great scientists, inventors, philosophers and clergyman. People like Benjamin Franklin who discovered electricity, John Glenn who was the first American in space, and Daniel Webster who invented the Dictionary. It is people like them, willing to make sacrifices to benefit of the nation, who do the most to advance our society. In light of the recent deep emotional divisions which our current leaders created and are now unable to fix, we need a Congressman who can bring people together, who can heal the wounds.
Now I must ask you where in the can you find a man so extroardinaire. Look no further. The man in whome these qualities dwell is me.
In love and romance a Congressman should be unimpeachable and his heart and mind as pure as the morning dew. With a heart and a self restraint that is the envy of every saint he can easily work a miracle or two. In love and desire the ways of the flesh should offer no allure to him. But where in this nation or in the world can you find a man who is so untouched and pure?
Again I say to you, look no further. The man in whome these qualities bloom is me. I have never strayed from all I believe. God has given me an iron will. If I was the partner of Eve we would all still be in Paradise. And today I offer my services to my community and my nation as their next Representative in the US Congress. God bless America."

Things changed since then. Especially when I got compared to the little orphan boy Oliver, saying "Please sir, I want some more".

Things changed since when?

Look, I know you and I don't see eye to eye. I recognize that. However, if your faith is truly important to you, and I believe it is, you cannot allow yourself to travel down such a dark path. Heck, even if your faith isn't important to you, you can't. Take it from someone who knows, the things you talk about in that poem will lead you to some places where you don't belong. Aggression has a voracious appetite and if you don't feed it or kill it, it'll eat you alive. Hopefully, you'll choose to kill it or already have.

Things changed since when?

Look, I know you and I don't see eye to eye. I recognize that. However, if your faith is truly important to you, and I believe it is, you cannot allow yourself to travel down such a dark path. Heck, even if your faith isn't important to you, you can't. Take it from someone who knows, the things you talk about in that poem will lead you to some places where you don't belong. Aggression has a voracious appetite and if you don't feed it or kill it, it'll eat you alive. Hopefully, you'll choose to kill it or already have.
What do you propose that I should do then?
Yes my faith is important but it took a hit when one day, I realized there were people being hypocrites in the church I was a deacon at, pointed it out, was reprimanded by church officials for pointing it out and threatened with expulsion from the church.

People were using the church not as a place for worship and prayer, but as a place to hook up with members of the opposing gender for sex. They were sitting there every Saturday saying amen to the sermons and then turning around and doing the shit they said, while in church, people should not do.

The Bible says not have anything to do with such people, so I stopped going and I've never been to church since.

And later, they had the gall to claim I owed them an apology. What about the apology they owed me?

I'd actually like to point out that Saddam wasn't the one who bombed the refugees in Iraq, it was the US Air Force.

And I imagine that Kosovar refugees are refugees from Kosovo. You certainly mention them a lot, especially compared to the Native Americans.

(sorry, I made a typo earlier, it should be Kosovar, not Kosovan)

What do you propose that I should do then?
Yes my faith is important but it took a hit when one day, I realized there were people being hypocrites in the church I was a deacon at, pointed it out, was reprimanded by church officials for pointing it out and threatened with expulsion from the church.

People were using the church not as a place for worship and prayer, but as a place to hook up with members of the opposing gender for sex. They were sitting there every Saturday saying amen to the sermons and then turning around and doing the shit they said, while in church, people should not do.

The Bible says not have anything to do with such people, so I stopped going and I've never been to church since.

And later, they had the gall to claim I owed them an apology. What about the apology they owed me?

Well, first, I don't think yours is a position to judge from as I've said in the past. Second, there is only one person you can control, that's Robert Canales. Why would you let them affect your faith? Why would you let them turn you into the kind of person who writes that poem? You are defined by you and you alone. Setting aside prophesy, I believe when we truly look for our path in life that God lights it up like a runway, but in order for us to see it we have to find a place of peace to look from. Anger, voilence, pain, jealousy, pride, these things are like looking at that path at the bottom of a pond. From above the surface it looks your path is different than it should be. You have to quiet yourself so you can see where you are really meant to go. And I refuse to believe that your path is one of aggression, arrogance and jealousy.

Find a quiet place, and really look. I think you'll find a way to set aside your issue with a church that has no hold over you.

is threatening the Netherlands territory of the Dutch Antilles

Well, that was just a load of hokey. Really, we all had quite a laugh over here. BTW, a poll held here (in the Netherlands) had as result that 82% wouldn't mind if Chavez took over the Antilles. We just get a lot of trouble (drugs, problem causing immigrants) and they're basicly colonies,so...

Well, that was just a load of hokey. Really, we all had quite a laugh over here. BTW, a poll held here (in the Netherlands) had as result that 82% wouldn't mind if Chavez took over the Antilles. We just get a lot of trouble (drugs, problem causing immigrants) and they're basicly colonies,so...
You could always sell them to the United States of America. We'd hold a referendum for the inhabitants if they wanted to be a US territory or be their own nation and what not. Would Chavez do that?

You could always sell them to the United States of America. We'd hold a referendum for the inhabitants if they wanted to be a US territory or be their own nation and what not. Would Chavez do that?

Which is a load of bull, seeing as Netherlands would not sell it, the US would not buy it and you have no idea whatsoever what Chavez would do. Chavez never attacked other countries under false pretenses though, so that already makes him just a bit more trustworthy than Bush.

Wow. I'm shocked. How does that post jive with a post that says he is pure and had he been in the garden with Eve they would still be there? I was referred here by Whittier, himself, and I have to say I just find the information you are providing about him confusing. THe things I see here do not jive with the person he has presented in discussion with me.

I'm more shocked that the person who wrote that poem got 24,000 votes for the US House of Representatives five years ago.

where do you guys keep getting that garden of eve stuff?

Once again, for the hard of reading:

http://maxpages.com/constitution/Vetobob_to_run_for_US_Congress


Final paragraph.