I suppose I know nothing about them by choice. I hate to get angry, I think it's the biggest waste of time and politics tend to make me mad when I get it in large doses. I'm a very laidback person and I'd rather spend my time reading philosophy and the like instead of a newspaper or watching news channels. BTW, sorry for the confusion about my comment, lol.
Michael Moore
- Thread starter Goblin
- Start date
Cheeky Monkey
Banned
Iraq was a mouse to America's elephant.
It's a pity so many had to suffer because of this post 9/11 panic attack.
http://pages.zdnet.com/sartre65/gulag/id16.html
It's a pity so many had to suffer because of this post 9/11 panic attack.
http://pages.zdnet.com/sartre65/gulag/id16.html
It funny that no ones seems to care about the mass graves and the gassed towns in Iraq. It's always, the big bad Americans are running rough shod over the little countries of the world.
What about the mothers and fathers of the 300,000 that were found in mass graves? What about the brothers and sisters of those that were thrown into plastic shedders? Sometimes head first, but most of the time feet first, so that they could watch themselves die. Or how about the relatives of the people that were marched up to a building top blindfolded and thrown off?
How do they feel about being liberated? I am getting real tired of psuedo-intellectuals taking pot shots at this country. If it is that bad, get the hell out. Sure the country has it's problems, but all the anti-war crap does is fuel the a-holes fever for the deaths of more American soldiers. It is a different story when you are complaining about policy, but when our soldiers are involved, we need to be united in support.
BTW, Cheeky Monkey, I read that clowns ariticle. I just hope that you have the capacity to make choices based on fact and not rants and raves. Check out www.drudgereport.com once in a while. At least you may get some balance.
Ranger:glugglug:
What about the mothers and fathers of the 300,000 that were found in mass graves? What about the brothers and sisters of those that were thrown into plastic shedders? Sometimes head first, but most of the time feet first, so that they could watch themselves die. Or how about the relatives of the people that were marched up to a building top blindfolded and thrown off?
How do they feel about being liberated? I am getting real tired of psuedo-intellectuals taking pot shots at this country. If it is that bad, get the hell out. Sure the country has it's problems, but all the anti-war crap does is fuel the a-holes fever for the deaths of more American soldiers. It is a different story when you are complaining about policy, but when our soldiers are involved, we need to be united in support.
BTW, Cheeky Monkey, I read that clowns ariticle. I just hope that you have the capacity to make choices based on fact and not rants and raves. Check out www.drudgereport.com once in a while. At least you may get some balance.
Ranger:glugglug:
Amen, Cheeky Monkey... Pretty radical link. Don't know if I buy everything he says, but what I DO buy isn't being addressed by mainstream media, so great job!
Foxycougar, my apologies if I've made you upset. And it's every person's god given right to stick their head in the sand. I do it myself often. But is it possible that some thoughtful consideration is the price that has to be paid to prevent folks from being murdered? Maybe we can take this track: Would an end to this war make you happy? Well it's only little people like you and I who will be able to make it happen, because those in power seem to be far too removed from the carnage to care in any measurable way.
Ranger:
Re: Mass Graves. Does anybody have a link to photographic evidence that they exist? I haven't seen it. And if anyone can help here, please do. It's a key issue in many ways.
And here's a conspiracy theory that I don't have enough info to confirm or deny: Is it possible that these graves hold some of the thousands and thousands of Iraqi's that we killed in Desert Storm? Or by our constant shelling of Iraq since DS was supposedly over? Or by the economic embargo that decimated their healthcare system? Please, shut me up on this with a link, because it's just as possible.
Example: The long retreating caravan of mostly non-military trucks that we decimated towards the end of desert storm. If you don't have the embalming/burial facilities to provide individual graves for the thousands lost, you bury your dead in a mass grave. Again, I'M NOT SAYING THIS HAPPENED, but I am asking for clarification if anyone can provide it.
But before I shut up, shall we discuss the fact the we (US) supported/placed Saddam in power in the first place? Gee, guess that didn't pan out so well. What makes you think the folks in charge now are going to be any better for the average Iraqi? (See Chalabi, below).
Re: Fueling A-holes... None of us can make the claim that calling for peace hurts more soldiers or civilians than it saves.
First, if the fence-setting majority -- those folks like foxycougar, just trying to raise their families and get along with no grand plan of world domination or strife, AKA the majority in ANY country -- sees our soldiers as representatives of a thoughtful, caring, sane people, do you think they might be more likely to listen to what we (Americans and anyone else who loves democracy) have to say?
My point is that viewing this mess through the eyes of the average Iraqi gives us the most powerful ally we can have in the fight. An ally which will be more determined than any we have in the "coalition of the willing". In the end, it's the Iraqi people who will decide, not the US military or those who sent them there. (Just like we did in 1776). And I think the best way to gain their allegiance is by letting them know that all we want is a better, safer world for our kids and theirs. That world does not include shit blowing up, whether strapped to a 17 year old Iraqi, or dropped from the sky by US attack aircraft.
Second, will this kind of discussion cause more US casualties? I don't know, and neither does anyone else except the ones who respond with violence. But one thing I DO know... If discussions like this had prevented the war from ever happening, almost 900 Americans would still be alive, along with countless Iraqi's and Afghani's. And this doesn't even account for the thousands who will be maimed and never live the full lives they should have.
I agree wholeheartedly that in times like these we should be united behind our troops. And there's no better way to stay behind them than by never putting them into situations that don't necessarily "defend" the united states in the first place. Nowhere in the constitution does it say a military is to be used to "spread democracy". It's for defense of the borders and the nation's people.
Re: "what about the brothers and sisters of shredded..." I suggest first and foremost that they fight for their own freedom. And if they do not have the courage to do so, I do not expect an American to die for them. If they choose not to get rid of their leader because they prefer him to a foreign occupying power, then so be it. That's their decision to make, regardless of how "evil" we may think he is.
Secondly, if the Iraqi's do want a change, they must make the world know they seek assistance from abroad. Thus far the majority of the stories about atrocities and the people wanting us to intervene have come from the now totally discredited head of the Iraqi National Congress. Chalabi evidently gave secrets to our enemies, and he goes right to jail for bank fraud if he shows his face in Jordan. Now the administration is running from this guy like he's got sars. http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/not_in_website/syndication/monitoring/media_reports/2291649.stm
http://www.iraqinews.com/people_chalabi.shtml
http://www.disinfopedia.org/wiki.phtml?title=Ahmed_Chalabi
http://www.counterpunch.org/chalabi05202004.html
http://www.rationalrevolution.net/contents.htm (Note the last guy stopped writing in 4/2003, yet what he's saying is now backed by the "mainstream" press)
Of course, it would make sense that George and the boys would work with Chalabi. They have so much in common when it comes to the the world of high finance. http://www.rationalrevolution.net/bush_family_and_the_s.htm
Re: Drudge Report. Agreed that it an interesting choice vs American television or talk radio. But why is this news?
http://www.drudgereport.com/kerryk.htm
Fueling homophobia, perchance, just as congress is voting on gay marriage legislation? Or just plain sensationalistic crap to be investing time on when you're trying to be a news agency with clout? So what if they're both "touchy-feely"? Not my cup of tea, but certainly not worth a lot of thought.
And didn't Drudge run the same erroneous claim that the Daily News ran about Gebhardt as Kerry's choice for VP? Fingers point to Rupert Murdock in that clusterfuck, whose Fox news called Bush the winner in 2000 after everyone else called Kerry. (Quite a coincidence that a Bush family member employed by Fox made the call that time around, ain't it?)
Re: America, love it or leave it... Your other writings suggest you're brighter than that, Ranger.
Sorry, but I'm stickin.
And I hope you do to. I'd love to buy you a beer, sometime. (For the record, I don't hug men like Kerry and Edwards do. Even when I'm drunk.)
:glugglug: :hatsoff:
Foxycougar, my apologies if I've made you upset. And it's every person's god given right to stick their head in the sand. I do it myself often. But is it possible that some thoughtful consideration is the price that has to be paid to prevent folks from being murdered? Maybe we can take this track: Would an end to this war make you happy? Well it's only little people like you and I who will be able to make it happen, because those in power seem to be far too removed from the carnage to care in any measurable way.
Ranger:
Re: Mass Graves. Does anybody have a link to photographic evidence that they exist? I haven't seen it. And if anyone can help here, please do. It's a key issue in many ways.
And here's a conspiracy theory that I don't have enough info to confirm or deny: Is it possible that these graves hold some of the thousands and thousands of Iraqi's that we killed in Desert Storm? Or by our constant shelling of Iraq since DS was supposedly over? Or by the economic embargo that decimated their healthcare system? Please, shut me up on this with a link, because it's just as possible.
Example: The long retreating caravan of mostly non-military trucks that we decimated towards the end of desert storm. If you don't have the embalming/burial facilities to provide individual graves for the thousands lost, you bury your dead in a mass grave. Again, I'M NOT SAYING THIS HAPPENED, but I am asking for clarification if anyone can provide it.
But before I shut up, shall we discuss the fact the we (US) supported/placed Saddam in power in the first place? Gee, guess that didn't pan out so well. What makes you think the folks in charge now are going to be any better for the average Iraqi? (See Chalabi, below).
Re: Fueling A-holes... None of us can make the claim that calling for peace hurts more soldiers or civilians than it saves.
First, if the fence-setting majority -- those folks like foxycougar, just trying to raise their families and get along with no grand plan of world domination or strife, AKA the majority in ANY country -- sees our soldiers as representatives of a thoughtful, caring, sane people, do you think they might be more likely to listen to what we (Americans and anyone else who loves democracy) have to say?
My point is that viewing this mess through the eyes of the average Iraqi gives us the most powerful ally we can have in the fight. An ally which will be more determined than any we have in the "coalition of the willing". In the end, it's the Iraqi people who will decide, not the US military or those who sent them there. (Just like we did in 1776). And I think the best way to gain their allegiance is by letting them know that all we want is a better, safer world for our kids and theirs. That world does not include shit blowing up, whether strapped to a 17 year old Iraqi, or dropped from the sky by US attack aircraft.
Second, will this kind of discussion cause more US casualties? I don't know, and neither does anyone else except the ones who respond with violence. But one thing I DO know... If discussions like this had prevented the war from ever happening, almost 900 Americans would still be alive, along with countless Iraqi's and Afghani's. And this doesn't even account for the thousands who will be maimed and never live the full lives they should have.
I agree wholeheartedly that in times like these we should be united behind our troops. And there's no better way to stay behind them than by never putting them into situations that don't necessarily "defend" the united states in the first place. Nowhere in the constitution does it say a military is to be used to "spread democracy". It's for defense of the borders and the nation's people.
Re: "what about the brothers and sisters of shredded..." I suggest first and foremost that they fight for their own freedom. And if they do not have the courage to do so, I do not expect an American to die for them. If they choose not to get rid of their leader because they prefer him to a foreign occupying power, then so be it. That's their decision to make, regardless of how "evil" we may think he is.
Secondly, if the Iraqi's do want a change, they must make the world know they seek assistance from abroad. Thus far the majority of the stories about atrocities and the people wanting us to intervene have come from the now totally discredited head of the Iraqi National Congress. Chalabi evidently gave secrets to our enemies, and he goes right to jail for bank fraud if he shows his face in Jordan. Now the administration is running from this guy like he's got sars. http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/not_in_website/syndication/monitoring/media_reports/2291649.stm
http://www.iraqinews.com/people_chalabi.shtml
http://www.disinfopedia.org/wiki.phtml?title=Ahmed_Chalabi
http://www.counterpunch.org/chalabi05202004.html
http://www.rationalrevolution.net/contents.htm (Note the last guy stopped writing in 4/2003, yet what he's saying is now backed by the "mainstream" press)
Of course, it would make sense that George and the boys would work with Chalabi. They have so much in common when it comes to the the world of high finance. http://www.rationalrevolution.net/bush_family_and_the_s.htm
Re: Drudge Report. Agreed that it an interesting choice vs American television or talk radio. But why is this news?
http://www.drudgereport.com/kerryk.htm
Fueling homophobia, perchance, just as congress is voting on gay marriage legislation? Or just plain sensationalistic crap to be investing time on when you're trying to be a news agency with clout? So what if they're both "touchy-feely"? Not my cup of tea, but certainly not worth a lot of thought.
And didn't Drudge run the same erroneous claim that the Daily News ran about Gebhardt as Kerry's choice for VP? Fingers point to Rupert Murdock in that clusterfuck, whose Fox news called Bush the winner in 2000 after everyone else called Kerry. (Quite a coincidence that a Bush family member employed by Fox made the call that time around, ain't it?)
Re: America, love it or leave it... Your other writings suggest you're brighter than that, Ranger.
Sorry, but I'm stickin.
And I hope you do to. I'd love to buy you a beer, sometime. (For the record, I don't hug men like Kerry and Edwards do. Even when I'm drunk.)
:glugglug: :hatsoff:
Believe me, you are far from the person that I am targeting that e-mail to. I do apologize for the lack of research. Most of the time, I am between jobs and can only take a few minutes to get some of my opinion out on the wire. Normally it only goes out when I see some one sided posts.
I am not a big beliver in Drudge, but at least he has some counter to the article that Cheeky Monkey put up.
I am not a war monger by all means. Soldiers have mothers and fathers as do Iraqis civillians and even terriorists. But how do you get to peace when some bad guy just wants to cut off your head because you are non-Muslim?
I believe in the love it or leave it. Keep in mind that disagreement is acceptable, change is acceptable and freedom of speech is acceptable.
I will disagree with you that that lack of support for the troops on the home front hurts morale and boosts up the bad guys
Anyway, have to go, my admiring public awaits.
Ranger:glugglug:
I am not a big beliver in Drudge, but at least he has some counter to the article that Cheeky Monkey put up.
I am not a war monger by all means. Soldiers have mothers and fathers as do Iraqis civillians and even terriorists. But how do you get to peace when some bad guy just wants to cut off your head because you are non-Muslim?
I believe in the love it or leave it. Keep in mind that disagreement is acceptable, change is acceptable and freedom of speech is acceptable.
I will disagree with you that that lack of support for the troops on the home front hurts morale and boosts up the bad guys
Anyway, have to go, my admiring public awaits.
Ranger:glugglug:
foxfilm said:
I'm not upset by any of this, I really don't care about other's opinions of politics and I really don't care about Michael Moore (is that who this thread was supposed to be about??). I'm just saying that politics isn't my thing. I'm not one to pretend like I know things when I don't and I don't know about politics so I'm staying out of it.
Nice, Goblin, lol
America does have the biggest dick. Everyone wants us to assume responsibility for everyone else because we have it so good. Just look at this AIDs thing... Its ridiculous. United States gives twice as much as the rest of the world combined to fighting aids... And still they want more from us. I say let you fuckers die. You don't want our help in other things why should we help you keep your sex lives.
All intelligent beings are capable of communcation, and thus susceptible for diplomacy. No one gets born as a terrorist, criminal, pervert or any other kind of "deviant". It's all about the life situation and life experiences that makes people into what they become. If one decreases the poverty, oppression and other injustices in the world, you do also decrease the reasons to why people becomes "deviants". You can't fight violence with violence. Violent actions just creates violent counter-actions. It's all cause and effect, quite simple to understand, I think, a little more difficult to do something about, but if you try hard and work together anything can be done. All that's needed is time, patience and co-operation.
starman. i lived in europe for several years. i honestly dont think the european kids growing up today exactly realise what america has done for all of europe and basically the rest of the world. The problem that europeans have with america isnt the americans themselves, but the big business that comes from america. Unfourtunatley they dont realise that and they tend to attack the people themselves when in all actuality it is a small number of wealthy individuals that they need to turn thier collective agression against. Americens, the true hard working, blue collar, middle income 40+ hour a week working stiff wants to help other people in the world. they want to help them become financially stable, to contribute to the world economy. But, they are getting to the point where they could give a rats ass to how the rest of the world fairs. I have slowly become one of those disgruntled americans who feels that the french, italian, and basically the whole of the rest of the world can take a fly'n leeop into a shit soup for all i care.
And for al of those who think bush waged war in iraq because he wanted the oil? Um, hello, lets put the law of supply and demand here. Um less of something means the price can go up, the price goes up, the more the mark up. Hmm, now lets say Iraqi oil refineries do open up heavy and supply us with the oil demand, that means the price drops.. lets see here.. right now a barrel of crude oil is roughly 47 U.S. dollars and that make roughly 2-3 hundred gallons, after refinement. now ate 47 dollars a barrel the oil companies here in the U.S. make about 400-600 dollars a barrel. when oil was 17 dollars a barrel, the gas price was roughly $0.90-$1.05 a gallon. so they netted roughly 2-3 hundred dollars. More supply from iraq would equal cheaper prices. Since Bush own's an oil company dont you think that would be a stupid thing to do? I know i wouldnt want the market to get flooded by more oil. I would lose profit margines. Why do you think diamonds atre so damn expensive, because of one diamond distributor. they hold back not flooding the market with diamonds. Other wise that " diamond is forever" thing would be no big deal. Also, they now own the patent to make lab created diamonds. Which, incidently, has become so good that it is almost impossible to tell the difference between lab created and mined diamonds. Ooppss, wait, american companies dont own that business, and what has led to more mass murders then Bush's war? Thats right, the diamond industry. And in what part of the world does the dioamond industry mega giant reside? Hmm could it be Europe?
And for al of those who think bush waged war in iraq because he wanted the oil? Um, hello, lets put the law of supply and demand here. Um less of something means the price can go up, the price goes up, the more the mark up. Hmm, now lets say Iraqi oil refineries do open up heavy and supply us with the oil demand, that means the price drops.. lets see here.. right now a barrel of crude oil is roughly 47 U.S. dollars and that make roughly 2-3 hundred gallons, after refinement. now ate 47 dollars a barrel the oil companies here in the U.S. make about 400-600 dollars a barrel. when oil was 17 dollars a barrel, the gas price was roughly $0.90-$1.05 a gallon. so they netted roughly 2-3 hundred dollars. More supply from iraq would equal cheaper prices. Since Bush own's an oil company dont you think that would be a stupid thing to do? I know i wouldnt want the market to get flooded by more oil. I would lose profit margines. Why do you think diamonds atre so damn expensive, because of one diamond distributor. they hold back not flooding the market with diamonds. Other wise that " diamond is forever" thing would be no big deal. Also, they now own the patent to make lab created diamonds. Which, incidently, has become so good that it is almost impossible to tell the difference between lab created and mined diamonds. Ooppss, wait, american companies dont own that business, and what has led to more mass murders then Bush's war? Thats right, the diamond industry. And in what part of the world does the dioamond industry mega giant reside? Hmm could it be Europe?
I'm sorry, but USA is a democracy, and thus the people are responsible for which politicians they elect. If the people didn't approve of the behavior of that "small number of wealthy individuals", they wouldn't elect the politicians they elect, but would instead elect politicians that would try to do something about it.
I'm sorry, but only if you lived in a dictatorship the arguments you gave would make sense to me.
Last edited:
Togath:
Kudos on your assessment of the Average Working Stiff's (or unemployed stiff's) who have always shown concern for democracy, equality, and common concern for humanity. We've shown it with our tax dollars, and with our blood. (More blood than our elites have been willing to shed, that's for sure.)
And it's easy to get tired of the rest of the world's concerns when our domestic situation is in such a shambles. But when we find ourselves losing concern over other countries' opinions of what our administration is doing, we all need to just take a look at things from their perspective. I'm confident that we can fix our own problems without alienating our neighbors and friends who we've shed blood with, together.
And AMEN to the diamond industry. Bill Mahr made a great point about how if you want to really want to take a bite out of terrorism, don't buy diamonds. They're traded on the black market in lieu of cash, and the majority are mined in areas where workers are subject to mutilation and even death at the hands of the powers that be. Not industrial accidents, but forced labor under penalty of death or torture. Best condemnation of the diamond industry I know of: American Evangelist and "Journalist" Pat Robertson. He raised money via his religious network to purchase aircraft under the guise of flying in humanitarian aid in Rwanda (Operation Blessing). One plane flew, it was determined that the planes weren't large enough to carry the cargo, so they were used to haul heavy equiptment for the "African Development Corportation" a diamond mining operation that Robertson owned personally. (See Greg Pallast's book, "The Best Democracy Money Can Buy".)
Re: Control of the oil... Agreed that as supply goes down, price goes up. But the owner of the oil sees a total income ceiling even if his profit per barrell increases if there's a limited supply that he controls. Best for the owner here, lots of oil and lots of demand, with total control of the supply. Iraq/the Middle East is key in the whole "OIL IS EVIL" scheme.
In your scenerio, you say it's a bad idea to allow more oil into the marketplace. That's only bad if SOMEONE ELSE owns the means of production in the first place. Neocons like the Bush family just won't be happy until they own everthing.
Remember the communism scare we lived through for 40 years? We were told communism was a political philosophy bent on world domination. The domino theory, et al.
Well, world domination is exactly what neocons want, only with no government intervention or controls to make sure the people who don't belong to their exclusive clubs don't take it in the ass.
They keep telling us that this war is different, because terrorism knows no national allegiance. Terrorists don't have a "state" that can be invaded, no capital to occupy. There are pockets all over the world. That accurately describes the whole World Bank debacle: pockets of obscenely rich people using the governments of legitimate countries to generate wealth for themselves, which they in turn don't have to share with their fellow citizens. (See: Off shore tax shelters, corporations paying no taxes, etc.)
Bottom line, if these guys keep this crap up, we -- Average Americans, working stiffs, soldiers -- will be looking to other countries for aid instead of vice versa.
The enemy is not the population of any foreign country. The enemy is right here in gated communities, and the cameras are watching us. (Fun Fact: The average American has his picture taken 30 times per day without his consent. Security cameras that you see, and that you don't. Is this what the founding fathers had in mind?)
The good news is: Kerry/Edwards just might pull this off if the 50% in this country who don't vote will start. Now, if we can just get them to stop acting like republicans in red...
Peace, health, and prosperity, for all, regardless of whether your parents could send you to private school...
:hatsoff:
Kudos on your assessment of the Average Working Stiff's (or unemployed stiff's) who have always shown concern for democracy, equality, and common concern for humanity. We've shown it with our tax dollars, and with our blood. (More blood than our elites have been willing to shed, that's for sure.)
And it's easy to get tired of the rest of the world's concerns when our domestic situation is in such a shambles. But when we find ourselves losing concern over other countries' opinions of what our administration is doing, we all need to just take a look at things from their perspective. I'm confident that we can fix our own problems without alienating our neighbors and friends who we've shed blood with, together.
And AMEN to the diamond industry. Bill Mahr made a great point about how if you want to really want to take a bite out of terrorism, don't buy diamonds. They're traded on the black market in lieu of cash, and the majority are mined in areas where workers are subject to mutilation and even death at the hands of the powers that be. Not industrial accidents, but forced labor under penalty of death or torture. Best condemnation of the diamond industry I know of: American Evangelist and "Journalist" Pat Robertson. He raised money via his religious network to purchase aircraft under the guise of flying in humanitarian aid in Rwanda (Operation Blessing). One plane flew, it was determined that the planes weren't large enough to carry the cargo, so they were used to haul heavy equiptment for the "African Development Corportation" a diamond mining operation that Robertson owned personally. (See Greg Pallast's book, "The Best Democracy Money Can Buy".)
Re: Control of the oil... Agreed that as supply goes down, price goes up. But the owner of the oil sees a total income ceiling even if his profit per barrell increases if there's a limited supply that he controls. Best for the owner here, lots of oil and lots of demand, with total control of the supply. Iraq/the Middle East is key in the whole "OIL IS EVIL" scheme.
In your scenerio, you say it's a bad idea to allow more oil into the marketplace. That's only bad if SOMEONE ELSE owns the means of production in the first place. Neocons like the Bush family just won't be happy until they own everthing.
Remember the communism scare we lived through for 40 years? We were told communism was a political philosophy bent on world domination. The domino theory, et al.
Well, world domination is exactly what neocons want, only with no government intervention or controls to make sure the people who don't belong to their exclusive clubs don't take it in the ass.
They keep telling us that this war is different, because terrorism knows no national allegiance. Terrorists don't have a "state" that can be invaded, no capital to occupy. There are pockets all over the world. That accurately describes the whole World Bank debacle: pockets of obscenely rich people using the governments of legitimate countries to generate wealth for themselves, which they in turn don't have to share with their fellow citizens. (See: Off shore tax shelters, corporations paying no taxes, etc.)
Bottom line, if these guys keep this crap up, we -- Average Americans, working stiffs, soldiers -- will be looking to other countries for aid instead of vice versa.
The enemy is not the population of any foreign country. The enemy is right here in gated communities, and the cameras are watching us. (Fun Fact: The average American has his picture taken 30 times per day without his consent. Security cameras that you see, and that you don't. Is this what the founding fathers had in mind?)
The good news is: Kerry/Edwards just might pull this off if the 50% in this country who don't vote will start. Now, if we can just get them to stop acting like republicans in red...
Peace, health, and prosperity, for all, regardless of whether your parents could send you to private school...
:hatsoff:
Sorry, forgot to post a link for the most important reason why folks on this board should be interested in peace activism: Hot Babes.
http://peacebabes.com/
:bowdown:
http://peacebabes.com/
:bowdown:
Starman, I happen to agree with georges. This is a relgious war that finds success in killing innocent non-Muslims. You can't talk to some zealot with a sword getting ready to take off the top part of your body. You can't talk to some maniac with 10 lbs. of C-4 and 15 lbs. of ball bearing strapped to his body.
foxfilm....................well, you're beyond help. But, I admire your writing style and most of your research. If I took the time, I could probably match you point to point. We will have to agree to disagree.
I think that Kerry and Edward need to touch each other more. Geez, three months ago during the primaries, Kerry was all over Edwards on being too young, no experience, etc. Wow, what a change
BTW, I borrowed money and put myself through a very nice private college in the Northwest. And................paid it off being a capitalist.
Ranger:glugglug:
foxfilm....................well, you're beyond help.
But, I admire your writing style and most of your research. If I took the time, I could probably match you point to point. We will have to agree to disagree. I think that Kerry and Edward need to touch each other more. Geez, three months ago during the primaries, Kerry was all over Edwards on being too young, no experience, etc. Wow, what a change
BTW, I borrowed money and put myself through a very nice private college in the Northwest. And................paid it off being a capitalist.
Ranger:glugglug:
hi foxfilm
I have heard on VOA as well as i read in magazines that Kerry was at the back of the troops during vietnam.So i will not agree to say that he faced the ennemy directly because he was never injuried and probably never attacked an ennemy face to face.Bush was an air force reservist.Go and tell that air force reservists wifes that air force reservists were not active during vietnam and you will be flamed like you will never be flamed.Kerry isn't that brave.
regards
georges
I have heard on VOA as well as i read in magazines that Kerry was at the back of the troops during vietnam.So i will not agree to say that he faced the ennemy directly because he was never injuried and probably never attacked an ennemy face to face.Bush was an air force reservist.Go and tell that air force reservists wifes that air force reservists were not active during vietnam and you will be flamed like you will never be flamed.Kerry isn't that brave.
regards
georges
Similar threads
