NationStates Jolt Archive

I think it's funny. Here we have a democratically elected government and Clinton and Levin want the elected leader replaced. I don't like al-Maliki either but it is not up to the US to get rid of him, it's up to the people of Iraq.

In any case I guess he isn't a big Clinton supporter. :D

Angry Iraqi leader lashes out at Clinton

By QASSIM ABDUL-ZAHRA, Associated Press Writer 41 minutes ago

BAGHDAD - Iraq's beleaguered prime minister on Sunday lashed out at Democrats who have called for his ouster, saying Sens. Hillary Rodham Clinton and Carl Levin need to "come to their senses."
ADVERTISEMENT

Nouri al-Maliki, who is fighting to hold his government together, issued a series of stinging ripostes against a variety of foreign officials who recently have spoken negatively about his leadership. But those directed at Democrats Clinton, of New York, and Levin, of Michigan, were the most strident.

"There are American officials who consider Iraq as if it were one of their villages, for example Hillary Clinton and Carl Levin. They should come to their senses," al-Maliki said at a news conference.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070826/ap_on_re_mi_ea/iraq_070825153927;_ylt=Au2iC1qB.mwLyWVG1XKZPZdlM3wV

it does sort of break the illusion when US officials talk about the iraqi government as if it is a mere puppet of the united states.

Al-Maliki shows spine and I love it.

Whats the US going to do....invade?:p



"There are American officials who consider Iraq as if it were one of their villages, for example Hillary Clinton and Carl Levin. They should come to their senses," al-Maliki said at a news conference.


I have to agree with this. It seems like people in the American government think they have the right to tell other nations how to run themselves.

Well I don't like her either.

it does sort of break the illusion when US officials talk about the iraqi government as if it is a mere puppet of the united states.

QFT

BAGHDAD - Iraq's beleaguered prime minister on Sunday lashed out at Democrats who have called for his ouster, saying Sens. Hillary Rodham Clinton and Carl Levin need to "come to their senses."
Aren't democrats meant to be, well, democratic?

ADVERTISEMENT
*buys unspecified product*

Well I don't like her either.

Nor do I. I guess we have more in common with the Iraqi leader than Hillary Clinton then :p

Al-Maliki shows spine and I love it.

You know, Saddam had a spine and stood up against democrats, too. So did you love him too?

Whats the US going to do....invade?:p

No, put Saddam back in power....Oh, wait...:D

Nor do I. I guess we have more in common with the Iraqi leader than Hillary Clinton then :p

Maybe I should send him a tee shirt. :D

I think it's funny. Here we have a democratically elected government and Clinton and Levin want the elected leader replaced. I don't like al-Maliki either but it is not up to the US to get rid of him, it's up to the people of Iraq.

Why not? We got rid of the last guy. Look how well that turned out. :p

QFT

2nded.

Maybe I should send him a tee shirt. :D

http://trevor.typepad.com/photos/uncategorized/republicans_for_voldemort.png

Why not? We got rid of the last guy. Look how well that turned out. :p

Gotta make the invasion humorous enough for people to laugh rather than kill though.

I suggest putting you as the top of the pentagon :p

Gotta make the invasion humorous enough for people to laugh rather than kill though.

I suggest putting you as the top of the pentagon :p

Shortly afterward, you would read this in the paper:

"11,000 special forces operatives have just completed a daring nighttime mission into the heart of Baghdad where they saran wrapped toilets, filled shoes with shaving cream and then chloroformed and superglued several prominent Iraqi diplomats together in compromising positions. Responding to the attack, Iraqi Prime Minister al-Maliki raged, 'You fuckin' assholes!' "

Defense Secretary Goofball responds to Iraqi verbal defiance with increase in pudding bombings over Baghdad.

*sighs wistfully*

http://trevor.typepad.com/photos/uncategorized/republicans_for_voldemort.png

Well, seeing as you asked...

http://www.thoseshirts.com/images/rect-lie-bk.jpg

And y'all thought I was going to post the other one. :p

Hillary Clinton's tenuous belief in democracy is worryingly reminiscent of Stalin's brand of authoritarianism.

Hillary Clinton's tenuous belief in democracy is worryingly reminiscent of Stalin's brand of authoritarianism.
As in "it was totally fit for the purpose"?

Hillary Clinton's tenuous belief in democracy is worryingly reminiscent of Stalin's brand of authoritarianism.

http://www.boomspeed.com/looonatic/dilbert1.gif

http://www.boomspeed.com/looonatic/dilbert1.gif

Hillary may be a horse, but she isn't dead yet. :p

Hillary Clinton's tenuous belief in democracy is worryingly reminiscent of Stalin's brand of authoritarianism.

You're right!

OBAMA '08!

You're right!

OBAMA '08!

I'd rather pick someone who's not a socialist; however, I do agree that Obama is not nearly as tyrannical as Hillary. Ron Paul immediately springs to mind as an exemplary candidate.

I'd rather pick someone who's not a socialist; however, I do agree that Obama is not nearly as tyrannical as Hillary. Ron Paul immediately springs to mind as an exemplary candidate.

1- You don't know what a socialist is.

2- Obama isn't one.

3- One would think you'd support someone like Romney or some other incarnation of darkness. Ron Paul isn't that repulsive. There are better people than him, but he's not that repulsive.

4- The reason I don't support Hillary is due to strategic reasons only.

1- You don't know what a socialist is.

Someone who favors state control over the free market; look at all those preposterous "universal health-care" schemes by the socialist Democratic candidates to see what I mean. Look at the hideously flawed socialist pension system we have, which is in dire need of an overhaul.

2- Obama isn't one.

He's black enough and he's man enough, but he's too red.

3- One would think you'd support someone like Romney or some other incarnation of darkness. Ron Paul isn't that repulsive. There are better people than him, but he's not that repulsive.

Despite what you may believe, I don't support the most repulsive candidate; rather, I choose the one whose ideals align most closely with mine. Being a freedom-loving libertarian, I whole-heartedly love Ron Paul (except for a few minor blemishes on his record in regard to social and military policy).

4- The reason I don't support Hillary is due to strategic reasons only.

And what might those "strategic reasons" of yours be? Perhaps a desire to quash her ambitions of turning the USA into the USSA?

By the way, do you know what Hillary Rodham Clinton anagrams to?

Criminally hath no lord.

I see an invasion coming in about 10 years by Bush Jr. Jr.

And what might those "strategic reasons" of yours be? Perhaps a desire to quash her ambitions of turning the USA into the USSA?

Obama fares better in the elections.

Obama fares better in the elections.

Yes, but once the public catches wind of his murky madrasah past and his middle name, his flimsy support will rapidly evaporate.

By the way, do you know what Hillary Rodham Clinton anagrams to?

Criminally hath no lord.

Do you know what FreedomAndGlory anagrams to?

Dom And Gore Frely.

Yes, but once the public catches wind of his murky madrasah past and his middle name, his flimsy support will rapidly evaporate.

You mean his past as a... Christian man.

Yeah, I can see how that's murky.

Do you know what FreedomAndGlory anagrams to?

Dom And Gore Frely.

That doesn't make much sense whereas my anagram implied that Hillary Clinton was criminally atheist. Additionally, Hussein's name anagrams to the following:

A bareback moan sushi.

Use your imagination. :eek:

Yes, but once the public catches wind of his murky madrasah past and his middle name, his flimsy support will rapidly evaporate.

The public has already gotten wind of that, and of its debunking. I think his candidacy survived it. Nice try, though.

criminally atheist.

This is an oxymoron. You can be a criminal that HAPPENS TO BE an Atheist or a Christian, but you can't be a criminal FOR belonging to a given belief system or lack thereof.

A bareback moan sushi.

Use your imagination. :eek:

I am, and I'm picturing body sushi. Which would be great were it not for the fact that body heat tends to cause the quality of sushi to go down.

For the record, no, not sushi on HIS body, but on a sexy Asian female's one.

This is an oxymoron. You can be a criminal that HAPPENS TO BE an Atheist or a Christian, but you can't be a criminal FOR belonging to a given belief system or lack thereof.

You can in F&G's perfect world. Thank God we don't live in it.

This is an oxymoron. You can be a criminal that HAPPENS TO BE an Atheist or a Christian, but you can't be a criminal FOR belonging to a given belief system or lack thereof.

Unless the belief system is against the law. Such as a religion that says you must kill someone every day.

Click Stand;13000373']Unless the belief system is against the law. Such as a religion that says you must kill someone every day.

Doesn't apply, or else Christianity - with all its "shall surely be put to death" - would be forbidden. The RELIGION isn't forbidden, the acts are. Why someone would arrest someone that "put to death" a guy that mixed fabrics but not all Christians.

By the way, do you know what Hillary Rodham Clinton anagrams to?

Criminally hath no lord.

ROFLMAO

Good work, FAG. It's now sigged.

Doesn't apply, or else Christianity - with all its "shall surely be put to death" - would be forbidden. The RELIGION isn't forbidden, the acts are. Why someone would arrest someone that "put to death" a guy that mixed fabrics but not all Christians.

I think if a religion enforced murder and 95% of people who joined killed someone then I think the religion could be banned.

Click Stand;13000388']I think if a religion enforced murder and 95% of people who joined killed someone then I think the religion could be banned.

No, it couldn't. Yes, on account of those 5%.

No, it couldn't. Yes, on account of those 5%.

couldn't the same apply to a terrorist organization were the goals are to kill people and nearly everyone in the group kills people.

Click Stand;13000401']couldn't the same apply to a terrorist organization were the goals are to kill people and nearly everyone in the group kills people.

If you don't HELP them kill in any way, you're free to believe or support anything.

If you don't HELP them kill in any way, you're free to believe or support anything.

So if I were to join Al Qaeda, the U.S government would be okay with that?

Click Stand;13000489']So if I were to join Al Qaeda, the U.S government would be okay with that?

The United States Government believes that there aren't nearly enough walking, breathing targets, so they'd be glad if you joined. They need more moving, breathing, thinking targets.

Gotta make the invasion humorous enough for people to laugh rather than kill though.

I suggest putting you as the top of the pentagon :p

Do you know how quickly he'd seize power? He'd turn America into a banana republic. Literally. People wouldn't vote with ballots. They'd vote with bananas. And his secret police clowns will be waiting to squirt you with itching solutions if you don't do something funny 20 times a day.

Do you know what FreedomAndGlory anagrams to?

Dom And Gore Frely.

I prefer FreedomAndGlory = Moron Degrade Fly

I prefer FreedomAndGlory = Moron Degrade Fly

Well, there you go.

Do you know what FreedomAndGlory anagrams to?

Dom And Gore Frely.

Degrade Form Only. *nod*

Well, seeing as you asked...

http://www.thoseshirts.com/images/rect-lie-bk.jpg

And y'all thought I was going to post the other one. :p

What other one? A funny one?

Ngo Dinh Diem?

Ngo Dinh Diem?

Demon Hiding
:eek:

What other one? A funny one?

How about this one?

http://img300.imageshack.us/img300/6746/gopom1.png (http://imageshack.us)

How about this one?

http://img300.imageshack.us/img300/6746/gopom1.png (http://imageshack.us)

That one, yes, qualifies as a much, much funnier example. :D

3- One would think you'd support someone like Romney or some other incarnation of darkness. Ron Paul isn't that repulsive. There are better people than him, but he's not that repulsive.

Paul's a racist conspiracy nut. He's pretty damn repulsive.

Degrade Form Only. *nod*

Lunatic Goofballs = foul global antics.

Lunatic Goofballs = foul global antics.

FreedomAndGlory = Dragonfly Rode Me

Lunatic Goofballs = Agnostic Bull Loaf

This is fun!!

Lunatic Goofballs = foul global antics.

:eek: They're onto me! *escapes via mudpit*

FreedomAndGlory = Dragonfly Rode Me

I'm not one to toot my own horn, but:

Reform ye land, dog!

I'm not one to toot my own horn, but:

Reform ye land, dog!

Y'mean like reforming your land to Harlem's image?

Paul's a racist conspiracy nut. He's pretty damn repulsive.

Bear in mind that I was comparing him to Romney and Sam Brownback.

I have to anagram myself now dammit... um

A! Wash Ma Bum, Nub.

or perhaps

A Swab Human Bum.

Swab, meaning crusty, I think.

I have to anagram myself now dammit... um

A! Wash Ma Bum, Nub.

or perhaps

A Swab Human Bum.

Swab, meaning crusty, I think.

Wham Ma Anus Bub
:)

Wham Ma Anus Bub
:)

And this is why I love me som LG

This is an oxymoron. You can be a criminal that HAPPENS TO BE an Atheist or a Christian, but you can't be a criminal FOR belonging to a given belief system or lack thereof.


This is ridiculously nitpicky, but that's not an oxymoron. It'd be an oxymoron if atheists by definition couldn't be criminal, both parts have to exclude each other, not just be unrelated.

Sorry, carry on.

This is ridiculously nitpicky

Sorry, carry on.

Yes it is.

You are forgiven, I will. :)