Saddam Hussein Believed Captured in Iraq

[JustRalph]

Fox is reporting Saddam has been captured by U.S. Troops

6 a.m. Sunday

[JustRalph]

Somebody in Iraq is 25 million richer today......the bounty was up to 25 million plus some kind of other perks..........

[boxcar]

Gotta wonder how the Bleeding Hearts (especially the presidential candidates) are going to downplay this tremendous military coup.

But this lowlife's capture (assuming the reports are correct) coudn't have came at a better time, since the Iraqui Governing Council is in the process of setting up a War Crimes Tribunal. After they find this mass murderer guilty, they should take him back to the same hole the Special Military Task Force found this mole in, and bury him alive in it. It should make Saddam feel right at home!

Boxcar

[JustRalph]

http://www.justralph.com/santa_w_saddam.jpg

[Tom]

Q-What is the difference between a rat and Sodamn Insane?
A-Reach in a rat's hole at it will try to defend itself.

In the end, this POS was a total coward, a dirty, snivelling little coward hiding in a hole in a basement.

Message to Osama: Dig deeper, boy.......

Now, what to do with Sodamn?
First things first, break out the thumb screws. Call in the CIA. Whatever means are needed, we make this pig sqeeeeeal.
The UN can stay out of it. This is not a human rights issue. It is Hussein, and WE got him. He is OURS. I would let Bush #1 connect the first electrode.
When all is said and done, we should sttrip him naked and turn him over to the crowd of Iraqis dancing in the streets.
Cnn, FOX, get this on tape.
I wonder if that meat hook they hung Musselini on is in some museum somehwhere?

Should interesting what spin the 8 demo candidates put on this one? (or, as I like to call them, the Wack Pack).
I see Liberman was already on camera spinning himslef into a hero this morning. Something very "vichy" about this guy

;)

[Tom]

Just saw the video of Hussein getting a medical check up.
What were they looking for in his hair?
Lice or WMD???:rolleyes:

That swab they were stickin gin his mouth......I have a better idea! :eek:

[ljb]

Glad to hear we got the evil dog.
I guess we can bring our troops home now. Good news for all.

[boxcar]

Yo-Yo Wrote:

Glad to hear we got the evil dog.
I guess we can bring our troops home now. Good news for all.

Why do you have to denigrate a member of the animal kingdom by bringing an amoral dog down to Saddam's level of depravity!?

But the the really good news is that you're not running the war by your ill-conceived and mindless guessing. The troops will come home when the job is completed, i.e. when the country is secure.

Moreover, even better news would be that the troops that were sent to Kosovo and Bosnia by Slick Willy be sent home.

Boxcar

[ljb]

Do-Do wrote:
But the the really good news is that you're not running the war by your ill-conceived and mindless guessing.
Then who's ill-conceived and mindless guessing are we running it by ?
Guess 1. They have WMD! WRONG
Guess 2. They are a threat to us! WRONG
Guess 3. They are going to nuke us! WRONG
Guess 4. Saddam is an evil man ! Right but is a third rate dictator worth the lives lost and the tax dollars spent?

[Lefty]

ljb, leave it to you to downplay a good thing. Your post proves you haven't been paying close attention to this war at all.
There's always hope for you ljb, maybe the 9th circuit court will declare his capture unconstitutional and demand he be set free.

[ponyplayer]

Yeah! What Lefty just said. :mad:

[boxcar]

Yo-YO with his selectively short memory writes:

Then who's ill-conceived and mindless guessing are we running it by ?

Hey, Mr. Dumb-Down, two things:

The "who's" should be whose. And its poor grammar to end a sentence with a preposition (although I'm probably wasting bandwith telling you this, since chances are many you don't know what a preposition is).

Guess 1. They have WMD! WRONG
Guess 2. They are a threat to us! WRONG

You have forgotten that it's the past three adminsitrations (including Slick Willy's) that have been "guessing wrong", and numerous congress critters on both sides of the aisle during those admininstrations have also believed that Hussein had WMD.

Guess 3. They are going to nuke us! WRONG

The present administration has never said this. What they have said, however, is that Hussein was very interested in laying his mits on nukes, developing a nuclear program, etc. And I suppose you believe Saddam wanted this for the good of mankind, right?

Guess 4. Saddam is an evil man!

Good thing you didn't malign some poor animal again. I would have been forced to sic PETA on you.

Boxcar

[Larry Hamilton]

I have spent the last 2 months or so getting the word "stupid" out of my 3-yo grandson's spoken vocabulary only to come to the conclusion that the word is iin our vocabulary for a very good reason.

[boxcar]

Originally posted by Lefty
ljb, leave it to you to downplay a good thing. Your post proves you haven't been paying close attention to this war at all.
There's always hope for you ljb, maybe the 9th circuit court will declare his capture unconstitutional and demand he be set free.

LOL! Hey, Lefty, I take it that you heard about the latest unanimous S.C. overturn of a 9th Circus ruling? I mean...to get a unanimous decision out of of the Supremes that has no fewer that four (4) libs on it and a proverbial fence straddler is no easy feat. But if anyone can do it, that poor, pathetic excuse for a Federal Appelate Court can... and has done so on many previous occasions.

Boxcar

[Derek2U]

LJB ... some things You type make sense, but this harping bout
Iraq & WMD is pointless. Saddam had 2 b dumped & his
capture today is spectacular great. Yes, Bush lied & he could
have just said ... "i gotta go in & shoot that jerks kneecaps"
but heY lets celebrate.

[Amazin]

Lynch mob mentality rules this board. Bush killed more innocent Iraqi's than 9/11 killed innocent Americans in the name of Iraqi freedom .Why don't we capture Bush and hang the hypocryte high.Oh... like some distinguished guests on this board have said,"we are the good guys'. That's right,keep telling yourself that as Cheney's Hallibuton overcharges the government and taxpayers by 61 million dollars with no bid contracts. You couldn't spot corruption if Bush came right out and said."This ain't about Saddam.It's about our control of the region which we've been trying to regain since the Iraqi revolution. We just make idiots like those on the PA board think it's about democracy and justice when we've encouraged and performed the same murder Saddam did on Iraqi's. Fools, you know how we do it"

[Lefty]

amazin, why don't you just join Al Queada and be done with it?Then I can look forward to YOU being on trial. Your ramblings about Bush are certifiable.
But, I refuse to let you damper my happiness on this glorious day.

[freeneasy]

ljb, such a ring ding
to identify this man as a third rate dictator simply spells out the level of comprehention with which your third rate understanding of this entire situation is pitifully based upon.
this man is not by any degree of the imagination a third rate dictor.
to murder, steal, starve, destroy and imprision an entire nation of people.
to terroize, ravage, rape, burn, bury, and hide the dead.
to keep and maintain an entire nation of people lavished in poverty, filth and unsanitary living coditions.
and to promote, teach, maintain and keep an entire nation of people to be steeped in the lowest degree of education and the highest degree of ignorance and prejudicism truly denotes the magnitude and level of dictorial control that this man stood upon.
the man far surpassed the level of a first rate dictator.
in his own rite the man was a genius and will have his place in the history of infamy next to the likes of adolf hitler.
third rate, thats rich.
your a moron from the planet boron and could'nt figure out your butt from a burnt bisquit if you took a bite out of each one.
third rate.. go home boy and tell yo mama to give you a spanking

[ljb]

Amazin,
Glad to see we have at least one sane person on this thread. The loonies are having a field day today. Something must have happened to get them all excited. Can't imagine this much joy over the capture of a third rate dictator.

[Lefty]

ljb, amazin, why don't you guys want Iraq to have a democracy? or are you just against democracy and even wish maybe this country would adapt another form of govt?Or is it you just don't want George W. Bush to get the credit?
3 valid questions?
And why am I overjoyed at Sadaam's capture? Because he has caused much human suffering. I thght you guys were humanitarans? NOT!
BTW, Free, Great Post!

[lsbets]

Amazin, I was wondering where you had been. I was wondering if you had gone to join the "resistance" in Iraq. Seeing as I'm headed that way, I was looking forward to running into you. LOL

LJB -

No less a conservative than Hillary Clinton was on Meet the Press last week talking about how the war was justified and her husband had the same intel when he was Pres. Are you going to call her a right winger? Also, don't worry about our troops, we'll come home when the job is done.

[Amazin]

Forcing Democracy on a people is a contradiction in terms.The people must choose their own form of government.And BTW if you are so democratic how come Kuwait and Saudi Arabia are not liberated .They are monarchies,no free elections. But they serve U.S, interests,so democracy there is not an issue for the U.S. government who acts like they really care about democracy and freedom. Another contradiction. The lie is obvious.
Not only that,the U.S. will intervene militarily should these anti-democratic governments be threatened . What a croc.
Get real.

[JustRalph]

Originally posted by Amazin
Lynch mob mentality rules this board. Bush killed more innocent Iraqi's than 9/11 killed innocent Americans in the name of Iraqi freedom .Why don't we capture Bush and hang the hypocryte high.

Careful Amazin......
advocating the "hanging " of a sitting President is not something to be bantered about.........you may find yourself visited by the guys in dark suits with big pockets........( a little John Hinckley reference there) :cool:

[Lefty]

ls, thank you for your service. I am sure every true american's prayers are with you.

amazin, Kuwaite, Saudi arabia non-analgous in terms of Iraq. But don't let pesky facts get in your way.

There is joy in Baghdad; don't look like they are being forced into democracy but liberated from a tyrant so they may pursue democracy. Once again, don't let the facts obscure your hate.

[boxcar]

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Amazin
Forcing Democracy on a people is a contradiction in terms.The people must choose their own form of government.And BTW if you are so democratic how come Kuwait and Saudi Arabia are not liberated. They are monarchies,no free elections

Hey, A Maze, weren't you the one who said on another thread several weeks ago that the U.S. has turned its back on all the democracies in the Middle East? Seems the poor ol' USA can't win fer losin'. We either snub our noses at such countries or embrace Arab monarchies. I guess the only viable solution (according to you) would be to reject the monarchies and embrace all those democratic states -- providing, we can find any, of course!

When are you leaving to join the Iraqi insurgents? I'll be happy to buy you a one-way ticket outa here.

Boxcar

[lsbets]

So Amazin, were the Iraqis free to choose their government when your man Hussein was in charge? Come back to planet earth dude, the oxygen is in too short of a supply in that orbit of yours and has affected your brain.

Lefty, thanks for the thoughts. Amazin just simply amazes me, and I thought more of ljb until he decided to align himself with Amazin on the loony left today. Before this, I thought he was someone who you could have an intelligent disagreement with, but he has decided to jump in the same trash heap that Amazin calls home. Oh well, such is the beauty of democracy and a free nation.

[JustRalph]

Originally posted by Amazin
Oh... like some distinguished guests on this board have said,"we are the good guys'. That's right,keep telling yourself that as Cheney's Hallibuton overcharges the government and taxpayers by 61 million dollars with no bid contracts. You couldn't spot corruption if Bush came right out and said."This ain't about Saddam.It's about our control of the region which we've been trying to regain since the Iraqi revolution. We just make idiots like those on the PA board think it's about democracy and justice when we've encouraged and performed the same murder Saddam did on Iraqi's. Fools, you know how we do it"

Right after I emailed your note to the Secret Service I read the rest of this crap. You know Amazin........you are right. It is about control. I don't think many deny that. It is about control of an entire region. No Sh@# Sherlock. Every tin horn Sand Governor over there now has spent the last six months watching the best military in the world roll over "the fierce fighting Republican Guards" and we did it trying not to kill civilians. We could have done it in one day instead of 3. Anyway.....now they see that they could end up living in holes in the ground too. It does mean something you know. When they execute the bastard guys like Qaddaffi will just hunker down more. The Saudi's and the Syrians will be less reluctant to get into bed with anybody but their 37 wives and we will be safer. The Democracy stuff is the long term effect. Kicking somebodies ass was the first. Meating out justice for that somebody was 2nd and now we can get on with letting Democracy grow. The first two make statements. Every place the seed of Democracy is planted it seems to grow like crazy. and that is the biggest threat over the long haul to all of our enemies in that area. Carp all you want.........these were things that had to be done after 9-11. We are getting them done.

I laughed after hearing the Congratulatory notes from Germany and France...........they still want in on the big money over there. They can both sit in the time out room for the next few years and realize how irrelevant they were. I am sure the staff that serves them will be former workers at the U.N.

[boxcar]

[QUOTE]Originally posted by JustRalph
Careful Amazin......
advocating the "hanging " of a sitting President is not something to be bantered about.........you may find yourself visited by the guys in dark suits with big pockets........( a little John Hinckley reference there) :cool:

LOL! Hanging Bush is about the only thing Left-Wing Extremists can think of for keeping the man from getting reelected. Even the hardest of the hardcore whackos on the DemocraticUnderground forum realize that no DemRat will get elected in '04 -- no matter who the nominee turns out to be. The scent of fear permeates that dump...which amuses me to no end.

Boxcar

[Amazin]

JR:Re men in black suits.

There is something called freedom of the press and as any 3rd grader can tell I was making an

analogy with lynching Saddam and Bush cause I think they are both guilty of the same Crimes:

I.E. killing innocent people for their selfish gains.

I'm amazed you realize it's about control,but is that the way to conduct yourself in the

international community. Democracy does not work well when forced upon a society. And what government

will be in Iraq.Chalabi is sitting on the Iraqi governing councel.This dude has lobbied the invasion

of Iraq for years.Can you say self interest.I can just see all those Iraqi's embracing him

for advocating an invasion that killed their friends and relatives.They will grow bitter and

another revolution will reoccur in Iraq to oust this puppet regime just like when the U.S.

shah was ousted in Iran in 1979.The U.S. will re-intervene and more senseless bloodshed will

occur for a selfish country trying to impose its will on another country. This is not the way to

peace.Duh.

[Lefty]

amazin, you say the Iraqui's will be bitter cause the U.S. killed their friends and relatives? How many of their friends and relatives did Sadaam kill? Thousands? Hundreds of thousands?
Who knows, they are still finding hidden graves...
Seems like Iraqui businesses springing up everywhere; looks like they are going to take to capitalism. Seems it's the libs in this country who are bitter; not the people of Iraq.

[JustRalph]

Originally posted by Amazin
JR:Re men in black suits. There is something called freedom of the press and as any 3rd grader can tell I was making an analogy with lynching Saddam and Bush cause I think they are both guilty of the same Crimes:

Yeah.....you see all kinds of reporters calling for Bush to be hung...right. What the hell makes you think you are "the press" anyway? You can try to sell that analogy to the guys in the suits. They probably won't do anything to you. But everytime the president is in your area, they will show up a day or so early and ask you and your family what your plans are, where you are going to be. They may contact your employer to verify your work schedule etc. Your family and employers just love it. The local police get a picture of you, they all know who you are everytime the President comes around, It's a bunch of fun for the next four years. Watch your mouth ......or you may learn these lessons first hand. Oh yeah......the local cops hate the duty of watching the local wingnut. After a while they just love you...........

[Tom]

Originally posted by ljb
Amazin,
Glad to see we have at least one sane person on this thread. The loonies are having a field day today. Something must have happened to get them all excited. Can't imagine this much joy over the capture of a third rate dictator.

Tell that to the survivors of the 400,000+ people murdered as a direct result of him and his regime.
Let's recap:

1. The taliban driven out of Afghanistan and freedom being restored there. Mass murder and public torture has ended.
2. Iraq freed from the madman that used WMD on his own people. Another murderous regime destroyed.
3. The economy, which was going south fast before Clinton left office is turning around.
4. The democratic party reduced to shufflin' Al Sharpton dancing on Satuday Night Live
5. No more terroist attacks on US soil.

Yep. This man is a loose cannon.




:eek:

[freeneasy]

pa-lease

youve captured a silver back gorilla where he has lived in and lived with nothing less then complete, total and absolute freedom of movement and mind in his jungles of africa.
now hes been forced out of such enviroment and put away into captivity and denial of his natural freedom thru and by the process of incarseration.
and now some 10 to 15 years or less have gone by since this animals capture and iprisinment.
there will reach a point where you can open the door to his cage walk in, walk over to the silverback, tweak his nose, turn and walk back out of the cage without having the slightest bit of fear that the animal will rear and attack as you would expect his nature to dictate, let alone attempt to escape as you would also expect his nature to dictate to an even greater degree
he has found no escape and in time will become so accuainted with his surroundings that the instinct of all survival will diminish.
so to with these people.
but with the reverse being true.
these people have never been allowed to exist with a freedom of choice and expresstion in any form.
freedom of speech, education, religion, enterprise. freedom to gather, vote and elect officials. freedom to hear, speak, agree and or dissagree with matters of personal and national affairs as well as simple matters of their own choseing.
they've been denied these basic rights and have never been allowed to develope an intrest in any of these basic rights without the assurence of death.
theyve been captured and confined without ever having the slightest taste of freedom. they lost all understanding of freedom and enjoyment of the benifits of freedom before they ever got started.
now that sadam and the threat of death has been put away freedom is whats left. and when a people has been forced, taught and dominated into believing that freedom has always been a crime punishable by death, once this belief system has become ingrained into the heart, soul, mind, thoughts, and senses of a man then many will naturally resist. but in time man will hopefully realize that freedom is good and that freedom is right and will want his freedom.
so to think that forcing a free election on these people is the case, then truly you er. its only a stentch to those who remain true to those who believe in sadam and the freedom he believes in.
hey when you were a kid, did your mom have to drag you down to the school aditorium to get your vacination or your flu shot, or your tetnis shot, or your polio shot ? oh no, not me. but in time we all realize the the importance of these things.
nobodies forcing anybody into anything. were attempting to give these people an opportunity to " taste and see"
may i say case closed now. thank you very much
:D

[Amazin]

JR

The First Amendment of the United States Constitution protects the right to freedom of religion and freedom of expression from government interference. Freedom of expression consists of the rights to freedom of speech, press, assembly and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.

This is from the U.S. Constitution.I live in the U.S.A. What country do you live in? And if you are in the military,what the hell are you fighting for if it takes away an individuals right to expression. And you call yourself an American?

[freeneasy]

you are a pencilneck, pantywaist geek

[Amazin]

Imagine an alien race from outer space coming to America and doing to us what we did to Iraq.They then install a government appointed by themselves and tell us that since thay are a superior race(stronger),this government will be good for us and we cannot choose our own way or elect our own officials until they deem appropriate.

If you would be happy living under the influence of a foreign power,then I can understand your support of the current Iraq policy.You are sheep. If you are not comfortable living under the influence of a foreign power ,then you are someone who is independent,likes to make up his own mind and resents the condescention that he is too inferior to do so.

Even a sheep mentality will eventually want their TRUE freedom from foreign influence. We aint in Iraq cause we discovered a newfound love for Iraqi's.We want to contol their destiny and their resources.Won't work. Retaliation will continue in the form of terrorism.

[JustRalph]

Originally posted by Amazin
JR The First Amendment of the United States Constitution protects the right to freedom of religion and freedom of expression from government interference. Freedom of expression consists of the rights to freedom of speech, press, assembly and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.

Thanks for the rhetoric...... I don't see anywhere in the Constitution the right to advocate the hanging of a sitting U.S. President. Come on Jerkwad! You can say whatever the hell you want and I don't care..........but calling for the hanging of a sitting President is a little much, don't you think? never mind, I realize the folly of that last question.........were done idiot........oh yeah....I notice you don't list what City you are in? Are you even in this country?

[lsbets]

Amazin,

You speak as if you are a constitutional scholar. Interesting though, that the word you choose to use over and over again, expression, is not in the first amendment:

Amendment I
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

It has been well established in case law that free speech has its limits. One cannot yell fire in a crowded theater, thereby causing a riot and hide behind his first amendment protections. Similarly, one cannot advocate the violent execution of the President of the United States. I think Ralph's origional point was you claimed freedom of the press, and my question is - what press? You could try to say freedom of speech, but I think you would be fighting a losing battle on that one, whether your comments were rhtorical or not. But press? Come on, what is this the Amazin Times? Press is not an issue here.

I also think that your tiny little pea brain has morphed Ralph and I into the same person. As far as I know, he is not in the military, although I think he once was. So, you ask,

"And if you are in the military,what the hell are you fighting for if it takes away an individuals right to expression. And you call yourself an American?"

I took an oath to uphold and defend the constitution of the United States, to follow the lawful orders of my commander in chief and those placed in positions above me. As I have shown you, your term expression is not in the first amendment, but I defend your freedom of speech, but precedent has shown that free speech has its limits. I fight so that one day, hopefully, my son does not have to. Hopefully, my son will not have to leave his wife and 18 month old child for a year and a half to travel halfway around the world and defend his nation. Hopefully because of what I do the world, my country, and my family will all be safer. I fight because I believe in my cause. I fight because there are those who would kill any of us, even you Amazin, simply because we are American. I fight for my soldiers, those I command, and those I serve next to. I fight for this nation and all it stands for. The United States is truly a shining city on a hill, a beacon of freedom for the world to behold. We have had our moments of weakness, and have made our mistakes, but all in all, we have the fortune to live in the greatest, most free nation in the history of the world. I fight so that fools like you can sit back in your comfortable living room and talk about what a bad place America is while you do nothing to change it and do not move away, as I wish you would. I fight out of a sense of duty, honor, and country. I fight in memory of those who have fought before me, both living and dead, and strive to live up to their expectations of what it means to be an American soldier.

Now I ask you Amazin, what do you do to stand behind your beliefs?

[PaceAdvantage]

Eminem didn't even specify what President he was talking about in his lyrics, but the SS was interested nonetheless.....tsk tsk Amazin.....tsk tsk.....

Like Lefty said Amazin, why not join Al-Queda...they seem to be travelling more on your wavelength.....

[Lefty]

amazin, how do you keep coming up with these flawed analogies.? If aliens came to America they would not find women being raped and executed in the public square. They would not find torture camps. They will not find mass graves. They won't be here because we broke our word to the United Galaxies some 17 times. Try again.

[ljb]

Amazin,
Your tenacity amazes me. You should really give up though, you are trying to communicate with a lower form of life. These primates just can't grasp what you are telling them. They have no ability to think in the abstract. Your arguments are at least one level above their comprehension , two or three levels for some of them.

[Dave Schwartz]

Here is a quote from a news story (Telegraph, UK)

Link to article (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2003/12/15/wsad115.xml&sSheet=/news/2003/12/15/ixnewstop.html)

++++++++
"We confirm it is him," Adnan Pachachi, the veteran former Iraqi foreign minister who now heads the council, later told a press conference.


"He seemed rather tired and haggard but he was unrepentant and defiant at times," said Mr Pachachi. "He tried to justify his crimes one way or another and said that he was a just but firm ruler. Our answer was that he was an unjust ruler because his crimes were responsible for the deaths of thousands of people."

+++++++++

While you idiots (and you know who you are) are busy attacking based upon your political agenda, there are people who are simply about the business of doing the right thing. Believe it or not, not everything is about political left or right. Sometimes there are simply bad people that need to be "removed."

This guy had so many people killed each year and yet was "unanimously" elected. LOL - What difference does it make whether he was put in power/supported by the U.S., the right or the left? He needed to go.

And to continue to villify Bush because a "few" innocents got killed (few, in comparison to the number Saddam would have killed during the same period) is just unfair. He did what needed to be done.

Just my opinion. (Sorry, Beth, I just have to erupt once in awhile.)


Regards,
Dave Schwartz

[lsbets]

Two great pages to see 3 great pics

http://www.interglobal.org/weblog/archives/003310.html#003310

http://www.rightwingnews.com/archives/week_2003_12_14.PHP#001584

[Lefty]

ljb, Rush is sooo right; you libs are too damn predictable.
Lib strategy: No cogent argument? Start calling people vile names.
Thanks for just being you...

[Dave Schwartz]

LSBets,

Followed those links, and one took me to the...

Democratic Underground (http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=104&topic_id=905367&mesg_id=905367)

On THAT page read the top 4 messages... it will blow your mind.

Aside from the fact that 9% of the respondents said that they were sorry Saddam was captured, one guy is saying that the 9% are the same ones that voted for bush from their group, while another is inferring that Bush is now gearing up to "pick on" North Korea.

These guys are simply not seeing reality here. N. Korea is beligerently developing nukes but if Bush goes after them HE (we?) are the bad guys? Looks like the "idiots" are not alone.


Regards,
Dave Schwartz

[lsbets]

Dave,

The links worked fine for me, i just tried them. Hmmmmmmmm - has Amazin infected your computer?

[lsbets]

Dave, just read that whole thread on that site, and wow, what a bunch of morons. Too bad they don't talk about horseracing, Amazin and LJB would be right at home.

[boxcar]

That Muslim FNC contributor (the one who spilled all the dirt on Clinton's refusal to take Usama into custody) just predicted a little while ago that by the time the Prez gives his State of the Union Address in January, the nation (and indeed the entire world) will have the straight skinny on the WMD situation inside Iraq. According to this contributor, some top former confidant and aid to Saddam, who is currently in custody, "promised" U.S. authorities that he'll sing like a canary about this particular issue once he knows that his former boss is dead or captured. Should be interesting...stay tuned.

Boxcar

[PaceAdvantage]

We all know America isn't perfect, but it's the best place I know of in this sad little world.....

And Amazin and LJB, as bad as you make this administration and country to be, I don't see you guys moving elsewhere, which speaks volumes.....

[Dave Schwartz]

LS,

Your links worked for me as well. Did I infer otherwise? Sorry if I did.

Dave

PS: Now that we've got Saddam, you don't have to go to Iraq, right? <G>

[boxcar]

http://my.core.com/~oldgrendel/chiathugbn.jpg

These two guys should bond immediately with the gift upon sight.


Boxcar

[lsbets]

Dave, I have gotten myself so pumped up to go to the races at the Baghdad Equestrian Club that there is no way I could stay home now. Think about it, I might be the only one in the whole country making speed figures! I could retire at the end of this trip. And, if there is any race fixing, I will have plenty of firepower to bring to bear.

[boxcar]

http://www.hpphoto.com/servlet/LinkPhoto?GUID=b0c371c3-2908-1d8f-4de0-3e1b344f6901&size=

[shanta]

LMAO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!:eek:

[lsbets]

Alright, now I feel like I have to find more pictures. Good one Boxcar

[lsbets]

Here ya go boxcar:

http://politicalhumor.about.com/library/images/blsaddamweekend.htm

[Amazin]

Don’t understand why right wingers conclude that because most of the country is not pleased about the way things are going in Iraq,that this segment of the population should leave.Over 150 million people.Hysterical stupidity.

I didn’t see LJB or me defend Saddam. Au contraire,I put Bush in the same league with Saddam. A murderer.I am just pointing out that you keep harping on how Saddam killed his own people,for his own gain,but you’re blind to the deaths Bush is responsible for directly. That is the hypocracy I am pointing out.This is not un American.This is pro life.

And as far as the “Democratic underground”,the person suggesting Bush’s cowboy policy turning to Korea is correct.Why is Bush increasing our Nuclear arsenal to an unprecendented level when the threat from other countries is not apparent and certainly not like the cold war days.So if Bush starts a Nuclear war and Billions die,I guess to you Bush lovers,he would still be “the good guy”.And Lefty would tell me how many others were saved with their deaths and Dave would tell me how “few innocent” got killed.Bush can destroy the world and he would still be the “good guy” to the brainwashed.

[Lefty]

amazin, most of the country not pleased about Iraq? That's another liberal fantasy.

[Lefty]

amazin, last I heard there was about 280 million people in the U.S. Are you saying 150 million agree with you? Wow! If the men in black do pick you up you can always plead diminished capacity.

[doophus]

Originally posted by Amazin
.............

.............., but you're blind to the deaths Bush is responsible for directly. That is the hypocracy I am pointing out.This is not un American.This is pro life.

..............Why is Bush increasing our Nuclear arsenal to an unprecendented level when the threat from other countries is not apparent and certainly not like the cold war days.
'mazin:

Cite for us the following:

DEATHS BUSH "DIRECTLY" CAUSED

Country, #Military Deaths, #Civilian Deaths, SOURCE

Also, you made the statement that Bush is "increasing our Nuclear arsenal to an unprecendented (my bold) level".....

Again, what is your source?

[boxcar]

doophus wrote

'mazin:

Cite for us the following:

DEATHS BUSH "DIRECTLY" CAUSED

Country, #Military Deaths, #Civilian Deaths, SOURCE

Also, you made the statement that Bush is "increasing our Nuclear arsenal to an unprecendented (my bold) level".....

Again, what is your source?

His source? How 'bout his overworked and unbridled imagination?

Boxcar

[ljb]

PA wrote:
" And Amazin and LJB, as bad as you make this administration and country to be, I don't see you guys moving elsewhere, which speaks volumes..... "
This is the old Viet Nam era prhase,
America, love it or leave it.
But i must point out, in my notes i do not express dislike for this country only the administration's actions cause me alarm.

[ljb]

Lefty wrote "ljb, Rush is sooo right; you libs are too damn predictable. Lib strategy: No cogent argument? Start calling people vile names. "
If Lefty would take the time to scroll back to page one, he would see the conservatives are the ones that started the name calling in this thread.
Please get facts straight before making accusations.
Thank you.

[lsbets]

LJB,

Just speaking for myself here and not trying to put words in PAs mouth, but until yesterday, I would have agreed with your self assesment, that you do not hate America and merely disagree with the Bush admiinistration. However, yesterday you decided to jump in bed with Amazin, I think your quote was that he is the only sane one on here. Let me remind you, this is the same man who has expressed nothing but disdain for this country, and has gone so far as to call the members of our military murderers who would be found guilty in any court of law. I have serious questions about the patriotism of anyone who would refer to such a person as the only sane one on this thread. As I said earlier, I used to think that you were someone who others could have honest disagreements with, yet still respect as an American with his own opinions. Now, I have to say that I am very disappointed. I thought more of you than you showed yesterday. I would like to believe that you were only trying to goad Lefty, but if that is the case, your judgement in choosing allies was seriously flawed.

[Amazin]

lsbets and military rhetoric

LSbets,you and others are constantly telling me how you are in the military and are defending my freedom to speak even if it is not agreeable to conservatives like yourselves. I believe your intentions are noble and that you honestly believe you are fighting to preserve the freedoms of this country.That may have been true in past generations,but you need to wake up to the new world order in this country that has gradually transpired.

You do not serve the same role as your anscestors.If you think Iraq was a threat to the U.S.(I'm sure you do)ask yourself,where was this country ranked as far as a world power.They lost thousands of people in an 8 year war with weakling Iran.They were beset with sanctions for 11 years right after that.Were they a power or a country weakened to the point of the ease of which it fell.Today the answer is obvious.

Therefore the deaths of American military personel in Iraq while noble in intention are in vain.Just suppose for 1 second that I was right,then that would be true.That's why when you tell me how you are going to Iraq to defend me,I am flattered. But I don't feel a need to be defended from Iraq and it is certainly in doubt to half of this country and most of this world,even Israel who it is more critical to.Furthermore you are unknowingly causing pain and suffering as an unwitting aggressor even though you don't realize that you are serving the new world order of the U.S. military.An aggressor,disguised in the themes of it's noble anscestors.

As far as actually defending our personal freedoms,you don't need to go to Iraq.Just go to Washington.The Patriot Act far exceeds any foreign threat as the biggest threat to our personal freedoms.

[ljb]

lsbets,
If you will note i post my opinions. i at times even say something similiar to your statment about not speaking for others. This topic secretes flaming rhetoric from both sides. My opinions about the current administration and it's activities coincide with Amazin's. This does not mean i agree with everything Amazin writes anymore then i would think you agree with everything some of the more radical rightys post.

[cj]

So amazin,

You don't think Iraq had any ties to the terrorists? No funding from Saddam? You know, those same people who killed 3,000 Americans on our own soil. I may defend you because its my job, but if I met you, I'd probably smack you in the nose. And at 6'2, 235, I doubt you'd do anything about it either. I'd call it Freedom of Expression.

[lsbets]

Amazin, I have reread your latest post over and over again trying to comprehend it. I know what you are trying to say, but you are not able to put a coherent paragraph together. I would have the docs check the level of your meds, I think they may be off.

[ljb]

Boxcar,
In my post to PA I mispelled phrase. May have been a typo i don't know but, just thought i would post the correction so you wouldn't have to point it out.
i know how busy you are editing my posts.

[lsbets]

LJB,

My point is simply that a person is judged by the company they keep. By calling Amazin the only sane one here, you tacitly support his more outlandish comments, which in my book raises some serious questions about you. If someone on the right made comments as out there as Amazin's, I would not get in bed with them simply because we agreed on some issues. I would condemn them as they deserved to be condemned, and would not lend them any sense of credibility at all. All someone like Amazin does is hurt your arguments and legitimate disagreements. It is a shame you cannot see that.

[Lefty]

doopus, his source? The aliens told him.

[Amazin]

lsbets

I think you know very well what I mean.

CJ

You're forgetting the third branch:the judicial. If you socked me in the nose for excercising my right to free speech,you would be in violation of my rights as a U.S. citizen. Of course you would also be charged with assault and battery.

But you make an interesting characterization. Many people who say they would die for for my freedom to speak,cannot handle what I say. Maybe they are not mature enough to live in a free society. There are no qualifications to live in a free society,but if there were,you would obviously fail.

[Lefty]

ljb, you are only worried about this administration? Strange, cause I was worried about the last one. When we had all those attacks on our embassies and on the USS Cole and the last admin did nothing I was worried. When the last admin let one of their biggest contributors sell China a system that would launch a satellite I was worried cause that system can be configured to launch missiles as well. When the last admin gave the Nuke ok to N. Korea, trusting them to kkep their word it was for peaceful purposes I was worried.

I worry no more. I have a leader committed to chasing the terrorists to the ends of the earth and is committed to defend this country against all aggressors. I have a leader who is devoted to the concerns of the people and knows enough about economics to know that tax cuts DO stimulate the economy. I have a leader who will not bed down with any whore that comes along, so I don't have to worry about him inadvertenly spilling our secrets to a spy. I worry no more.

[cj]

Originally posted by Amazin
CJ

You're forgetting the third branch:the judicial. If you socked me in the nose for excercising my right to free speech,you would be in violation of my rights as a U.S. citizen. Of course you would also be charged with assault and battery.

But you make an interesting characterization. Many people who say they would die for for my freedom to speak,cannot handle what I say. Maybe they are not mature enough to live in a free society. There are no qualifications to live in a free society,but if there were,you would obviously fail.

I'm not forgetting at all, I'd just be willing to pay the fine. It would be worth every cent in my opinion.

I have no idea what you do, but I doubt it has much meaning in the grand scheme of things. My job has a lot of meaning to me. That is why I've done it for almost 19 years now. It's also why I don't take kindly to people bad mouthing my profession. Like I said, I would happily pay the fine, and make a matching donation to a worthy charity.

You are the one forgetting something. Surely you can say anything you want, but you also must deal with the consequences of what you say. Its easy to say things anonymously on the internet as you so cowardly do. Try it in person to a real man sometime. I'm sure there is a post or a base near you!

[Lefty]

amazin, people willing to die for your freedom to speak do NOT have to like what you say. That is their right.

[ljb]

lsbets,
Please refrain from using generalities. Guilt by association will not hold up in court. (Unless you are talking about Ashcroft's court.)
i suppose i could peruse these notes and find some outlandish statement made by one of the rightys and accuse you of having the same sentiments based on your general support of their views.

[Lefty]

Cj, Ls, well you heard 'em. They'll take you to court. You know how libs like to go to court. Hell if they can't get what they consider the right vote from the people they just get it their way in court. Look how many referendums and legislative acts they have turned their way through a liberal court. Hell, you guys are the ones amazin wants to convict as murderers in court anyway.
Yeah, amazin, the SANE one? And ljb, says we have more to fear from the Patriot act than from a foreign govt. I guess he's the OTHER sane one?
Even a liberal like Feinstein,who pored over the Patriot act with "a fine tooth comb" could find nothing wrong with the Patriot act.

[boxcar]

Amazin wrote:

lsbets and military rhetoric

LSbets,you and others are constantly telling me how you are in the military and are defending my freedom to speak even if it is not agreeable to conservatives like yourselves. I believe your intentions are noble and that you honestly believe you are fighting to preserve the freedoms of this country.That may have been true in past generations,but you need to wake up to the new world order in this country that has gradually transpired.

Ahh...a globalist, and no doubt a big advocate for a One World Government. Problem with this, though, is that the U.S. Constitution trumps any international laws that contradict our Constitution -- most especially those that deal with national security issues. And for your info, no prez takes an oath to uphold some so-called New World Order. He takes it pledging to uphold the Constitution. (Now you know where to stick your "new world order', insofar as I'm concerned.)

A-Maze continues:
You do not serve the same role as your anscestors.If you think Iraq was a threat to the U.S.(I'm sure you do)ask yourself,where was this country ranked as far as a world power.They lost thousands of people in an 8 year war with weakling Iran.They were beset with sanctions for 11 years right after that.Were they a power or a country weakened to the point of the ease of which it fell.Today the answer is obvious.

What's equally obvious to intelligent, straight-thinking people is that you're still living in the Stone Age (either that or you're so indigent, you can't afford the services of a licensed proctologist to extricate your head from your hind quarters.) Al Queda, for instance, isn't a country -- just an organized terrorist group, and they have managed over the years to kill thousands of people all over the globe (over3,000 on our soil alone.) The rules of warfare have drastically changed over the years 'cause the world has whackos out there who don't mind blowing themselves up in order to achieve their political objectives. Korea is a real threat now because that country has a nuke or two that the government might be disposed to hand off to some terrorist group, if the price was right. Ditto for Iran, if they're allowed to build their reactors. Neither of these two countries are "world [military] powers" -- yet, either one of these countries could use those weapons on us (or any other country, such as an ally) directly or indirectly. You see, A-Maze, this isn't about conventional warfare strategy whereby one military power squares off against another military power (such as what happened in WW 1 11, Korean War, etc.) It's about rogue, lawless regimes or terrorist groups willing to indiscriminately murderl innocent civilians. (I'm sure you see my point, since you allege to be diametrically opposed to all acts of murder, right? )

Therefore the deaths of American military personel in Iraq while noble in intention are in vain.Just suppose for 1 second that I was right,then that would be true.

Given what I just laid out for you, how can you be "right"? You're so out of touch with what's going on in the world, I don't believe anyone would be able to bring you up to speed during your lifetime.

That's why when you tell me how you are going to Iraq to defend me,I am flattered. But I don't feel a need to be defended from Iraq and it is certainly in doubt to half of this country and most of this world,even Israel who it is more critical to.

Of course, you "don't feel a need". You're living in the past and suffer from AMM (Acute Mental Myopia). I doubt you can feel much of anything in the here and now.

As far as actually defending our personal freedoms, you don't need to go to Iraq.Just go to Washington.The Patriot Act far exceeds any foreign threat as the biggest threat to our personal freedoms.

Arguably, this Act may not have been such a great idea -- but this would be a discussion for another time, and with someone who is in possession of all his faculties.

Ciao,
Boxcar

[ljb]

Lefty wrote
"And ljb, says we have more to fear from the Patriot act than from a foreign govt. I guess he's the OTHER sane one? "
Lefty, where did i say that ?
Please claify your facts before making accusations.
Thank you.

[Lefty]

ljb, you and amaze say such similar things that if he said it and not you I apoligize. So you are a proponent of the Patriot act then? As a patriot you fear it not?

[ljb]

Lefty,
Are you baiting me? I was just chastised on another thread for baiting. see (weapons of math instruction)
I will wait until PA approves the note before responding.

[Larry Hamilton]

A quick trip to Websters will confirm that by no definition known in English are these two patriots. In fact, if we had declared war against a country rather than against "terrorists" , these two would be traitors. (this assumes they are Americans--another stretch)

[Tom]

Would you have prefered to let Sadam stay in power?
Can your infallible liberal sources give any predictions on how may Iraq's would heve been killed by he and his sons sonce LAst March? How many tortured to death slowly?
Had we left him there, what odds would you give Iraq for ever having freedom?
At least today they have a chance at it.
Personally, I don't think they will ever be a democracy-it is not in thier culture. But at least we are giving them a chance at it.
Hwy, who knows, maybe they will surprise the hell out me and do it, but I ain't gona hold my breath.
My bottom line in all of this is the we did what we did to fight terrorists and remove a threat. Freedom for Iraq was not on my agenda, and if that were all that were at stake, I would not have gone in. If they benefit, great, but my focus in on killing terrorists and those who harbour them, no matter who, no matter where.
And it will always be that way.
You are either with us or against us. Enough said.

[Amazin]

CJ

Your macho man act is pathetic. And you are indeed naive.You would pay alot more than a small fine. And for what?A few words that your puny perspective does not agree with. I see why you have chosen the military as a proffession.You have alot of angry issues within yourself you need to act out.

When I was a kid,I really wanted to kick my dad's ass. But he was alot bigger than me.Now I could break him like a pretzel. So why don't I? Because might doesn't make right. If a little old lady wanted to bring down a pro wrestler attacking her,she don't need muscles,just a .22. So first thing,forget about your size. There will allways be those whose ass you can kick and those who can kick your ass.

You are still on a primitive animal level.It doesn't impress me if you are a gorilla.That's just genetics. There is a much more difficult challenge to be a human being and that is within on a level that you haven't reached yet. People on that level are usually against war. Contrary to your ignorant idea that they are cowards,they have more guts than you know. They are on a level a notch above the animal level you are on.They know,there is a reason they were brought into this existence and there is a power that will bring ALL murderers to their knees. Bush is not innocent in front of that power. If you don't like that,it's not my problem.I don't make the rules. Tell it to your creator.

[Tom]

When it comes to asses, it always pays to know which ones to kick and which ones to kiss.



:D

[cj]

Originally posted by Amazin
CJ
Your macho man act is pathetic. And you are indeed naive.You would pay alot more than a small fine.

You are wrong again...once you started spouting off in front of a judge, I'd get off scott free! :D:D:D

Like I said, you are a person who hides behind a phony screen name and the anonymity of the internet. Feel free to protest outside your local military installation at any time. But see, you are indeed the coward. You don't tell us what you do for a living, or what your name is, or where you are located. You just spout of meaningless dribble that is insulting to myself and fellow men and women of the military. To quote the late comedian Robin Harris, "I don't be f!@#ind with you when you picking up them garbage cans!" So, why would you harass hard working military men?

As for people on "your level" being against war, please. If Al Gore, God forbid, had been elected and was doing the same thing now, we wouldn't here a peep out of you. A president's most important job is protecting the citizens of this nation. The defeat and capture of an evil dictator is a big help in that direction.

I am not the kind of person who would pop you in the nose, never have been. My point was I know damn well you wouldn't pop off your mouth in a local tavern like you do in here. A man of true beliefs does something to bolster his opinions and attitudes where it matters, not on a horse racing message board.

[Dave Schwartz]

CJ,

Well said. I would expect no less from you.


Regards,
Dave Schwartz

[Amazin]

CJ

What is your point?Do you even have one?You're allmost laughable.Your main message is I'm a coward.What does that have to do with anything.I really don't care what you or other conservatives think of me.I'm not selling myself. I won't tell this board what I do or where I live.That's my business.It may impress you but I'm not interested in doing that either..I'm making a point that war is wrong and our foreign policy is wrong in Iraq and that your personal maturity and spiritual maturity reflects whether or not you see things one way or another.But you are not the first conservative to belittle themselves by resoring to redneck tactics when they run out of intelligent things to say.

[cj]

Whoever said I was a conservative? Just curious.

[Amazin]

Me

[JustRalph]

I think it is time for a Tribal Council...........

[cj]

Why, because I'm pro military? I think most people in the military are, but that doesn't make all of us conservatives. Just shows you know not of what you speak.

[Tom]

If one were to go by your philosophy, the world would be have Nazi and half imperial japanese right now. After all, it wouldn't be nice of us to bomb the be-jesus out of Berlin and then take out Hiroshima and Nagasaki. A Lot of innocent people died in Germany and in Japan. The alternative was to submitt to domination. But that is what you endorse, is it not? After all, you do prefer an enslaved and dominated Iraq to a free one by your very posts. You favor slavery, torture, murder of civilians, etc. Because to stand up to a tyrant would be wrong.

Try a real world example. CJ punches you in the mouth. You try to reason with him. He rips off your ear. You lay it on him about how wrong it is. He breaks your jaw. You point out that he is clearly in the wrong. He puts a foot through your knee. You remind him that his behavior is intolerable. Then he pulls out a handful of your hair and pokes your left eye out.
A, at what point do you think it is permissable for you to retaliate?
Or would you strap on a bomb and go looking for his family? Your attempts to stop your pummeling with words has failed, you are about to die in the street, beaten down like Macy's front door the day after Thanksgiving, do you submitt or do you retaliate? When is it allowable to defend yourself?
You condem US for striking back against terror but rationalize the palestinean homicide bombers. Sadamm STOLE Iraq yet you think his right to be a dictator outweigh the rights of the people he enslves. He gasses thousnds of his own people and then you question our belief that he has WMD. He invade Kuwiat and sets the oild fields on fire and then tell us we are nuts if we think he is a threat to anyone.
Do me a favor-send me a picture of your computer room. I just have to see how you can sit in front of your computer and post this nonsense with your head so far up your butt! Is it some kind of ergonomic chair, monkee bars, I just gots to know!!!!!



:rolleyes:

[lsbets]

Amazin, I have not noticed CJ post any political commentary that would lead me to believe he is either conservative or liberal. Is that your form of primitive insults, to call someone a conservative? You are a laughable, pathetic excuse for a man. I feel sorry for you.

[boxcar]

Tom, I'm LMBO after reading your post. Methinks you told that Willing Ignoramus off but good! Great post!

Boxcar

[Dave Schwartz]

Tom,

ROFLMAO


Sincerely,
Dave Schwartz

Who is... oh, never mind.

[JustRalph]

Originally posted by JustRalph
I think it is time for a Tribal Council...........

I was hoping we could vote out Amazin.......

[hcap]

Reasonable minds MAY dissagree on war and more importantly on WHICH wars must be fought

For every Hitler or Mussolini that must be stopped there are questionable adventures we should not be too proud of. The Spanish American war, the Vietnamese war are examples where are motives were not, to say the least, "pure".

To assume we are always acting with "God on our side" is equally as dangerous as ignoring REAL threats to our security.

Lest we forget that this war was ORIGINALLY about WMDS and the so called "threat" Iraq theoretically
appeared to be. Of course after a few generations of "morphing" justifications by the administration, we are at "generation 5" or is that "generation 6"---The capture of a tyrant.

Am I glad he is gone, certainly. But as usual the news is out of historical context.

http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB82/handshake300.jpg

Saddam without quetion was a murdering tyrant, but for many years HE WAS OUR MURDERING TYRANT.
Installed originally by the cia and supported by adminiistrations of both parties.

From The National Security Archive . . .

"combines a unique range of functions in one non governmental, non-profit institution. The Archive is simultaneously a research institute on international affairs, a library and archive of declassified U.S. documents obtained through the Freedom of Information Act, a public interest law firm defending and expanding public access to government information through the FOIA, and an indexer and publisher of the documents in books, microfiche, and electronic formats.


http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB82/index.htm

Conclusion from this article

The current Bush administration discusses Iraq in starkly moralistic terms to further its goal of persuading a skeptical world that a preemptive and premeditated attack on Iraq could and should be supported as a "just war." The documents included in this briefing book reflect the realpolitik that determined this country's policies during the years when Iraq was actually employing chemical weapons. Actual rather than rhetorical opposition to such use was evidently not perceived to serve U.S. interests; instead, the Reagan administration did not deviate from its determination that Iraq was to serve as the instrument to prevent an Iranian victory. Chemical warfare was viewed as a potentially embarrassing public relations problem that complicated efforts to provide assistance. The Iraqi government's repressive internal policies, though well known to the U.S. government at the time, did not figure at all in the presidential directives that established U.S. policy toward the Iran-Iraq war. The U.S. was concerned with its ability to project military force in the Middle East, and to keep the oil flowing.

The operative word is "realpolitik"

[hcap]

By the way, here is a list of companies that did buisness with Saddam helping deliver us to our current situation
To see all the details of each companies involvement go to

http://www.laweekly.com/ink/03/23/news-crogan.php

Index of American Companies (and international companies with U.S. affiliates):

AT&T
AL HADDAD ENTERPRISES, INC.
ALCOLAC INTERNATIONAL
AMERICAN TYPE CULTURE COLLECTION
ASSOCIATED INSTRUMENTS DISTRIBUTORS, INC.
AXEL ELECTRONICS
BANCA NAZIONALE DEL LAVORO
BECHTEL GROUP
BREEZEVALE, INC.
CANBERRA INDUSTRIES
CARL SCHENCK AG
CARL ZEISS
CATERPILLAR, INC.
COMTEC INTERNATIONAL, INC.
CONSARC
COPELAND INTERNATIONAL, INC.
DATA GENERAL CORP
DEKTOR COUNTERINTELLIGENCE AND SECURITY, INC.
DOW CHEMICAL
DRESSER CONSTRUCTION AND EQUIPMENT
DUPONT
E G & G PRINCETON APPLIED RESEARCH
EASTMAN KODAK CO.
ELECTRONICS ASSOCIATES, INC.
ENTRADE INTERNATIONAL, LTD.
EVAPCO
FINNIGAN MAT US
FOXBORO COMPANY
GERBER SYSTEMS TECHNOLOGY
GORMAN-RUPP
HARDINGE BROTHERS
HEWLETT-PACKARD
HIPOTRONICS
HONEYWELL
HUGHES HELICOPTER
IBM
INTERNATIONAL IMAGING SYSTEMS
INTERNATIONAL SIGNAL AND CONTROL
IONICS
KENNAMETAL, INC.
LEYBOLD VACUUM SYSTEMS
LINCOLN ELECTRIC CO.
LITTON INDUSTRIES
LUMMUS CREST, INC.
MBB HELICOPTER CORP.
MACK TRUCKS, INC.
MAHO AG
MATRIX CHURCHILL CORP.
McNEIL AKRON, INC.
MEMPHIS INTERNATIONAL, INC.
MILLER ELECTRIC
MOUSE MASTER
NCR CORPORATION
NRM CORP.
NORWALK CO.
NU KRAFT MERCANTILE CORP.
PERKIN-ELMER CORP.
PHILLIPS EXPORT
POSI SEAL, INC.
PRESRAY CORP.
PURE AIRE
REDLAKE IMAGING CORP.
REXON TECHNOLOGY CORP.
ROCKWELL INTERNATIONAL CORP.
ROTEC INDUSTRIES, INC.
SACKMAN ASSOCIATES
SCIENTIFIC ATLANTA
SCIENTIFIC DESIGN CO., INC.
SEMETEX
SERVAAS, INC.
SIEMENS CORP.
SIP CORP.
SPECTRAL DATA CORP.
SPECTRA PHYSICS
SPERRY CORP.
SULLAIRE CORP.
SWISSCO MANAGEMENT GROUP, INC.
TECHNICAL COMMUNICATIONS CORP.
TEKTRONIX
TELEDYNE WAH CHANG
THERMO JARRELL ASH CORP.
TI COATING
TRADING AND INVESTMENT CORP.
UNION CARBIDE
UNISYS CORP.
VEECO INSTRUMENTS, INC.
WILD MAGNAVOX SATELLITE SURVEY
WILTRON
XYZ OPTIONS, INC.
YORK INTERNATIONAL CORP.
ZETA LABORATORIES

Index of U.S. Government Agencies:

CENTERS FOR DISEASE CONTROL AND PREVENTION
CENTRAL INTELLIGENCE AGENCY
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE
DEPARTMENT OF STATE
NATIONAL SECURITY COUNCIL
U.S. NUCLEAR WEAPONS LABORATORIES


Foreign Companies:
(Number of foreign firms by country — note: Some of these firms receive substantial financial support from their governments):

AUSTRIA: 3
BELGIUM: 7
CHINA: 3
EGYPT: 1
FRANCE: 9
GERMANY: 18
GREAT BRITAIN: 24
INDIA: 1
JAPAN: 5
LUXEMBOURG: 1
NETHERLANDS: 3
PORTUGAL: 1
SINGAPORE: 1 (Note: This company, KIM AL-KHALEEJ, also has links to Dubai.)
SPAIN: 3
SWEDEN: 2
SWITZERLAND: 7
USSR/RUSSIA: 6

[lsbets]

Hcap,

You say
"Reasonable minds MAY dissagree on war and more importantly on WHICH wars must be fought"

and you are right. However, Amazin has proven time and again that his is not a reasonable mind.

[hcap]

Isbets

Emotionally I am anti war and agree with many sentiments expressed by Amazin about war. Also I may be wrong, but he may also accept war as a last resort.

I think THIS war has fired the anger on both sides to the point where reasonable minds are no longer reasonable. My objections are not that we got Saddam, but more that the economic and political events surrounding this debate are not as clear cut as some may assert.

However, I chose to point to some uncomfortable facts hoping to generate reasonable doubt.

One more fact about Saddam

The vast majority of the war crimes committed by Saddam’s regime took place during the period in which he was supported by the U.S. government. This may be the primary reason why the United States objects to any kind of international tribunal, since it would more likely bring the U.S. role in Saddam’s repression to light than a trial set up by the Bush Administration’s appointed Iraqi surrogates.

[lsbets]

Hcap,

I would also add to your statement about reasonable minds being able to disgree that, once the decision to go to war has been made, it is our duty, as Americans, to get behind the war and lend our support in whatever way that we can so that the war may be brought to the quickest end possible. I am pretty sure you disagree with me there, but as all of the anti war crowd likes to point out, I am entitled to my opinion.

Why do I say Amazin's mind is not a reasonable one? Because he has called our soldiers murderers and because he justifies terrorist attacks and refuses to condemn them. He has shown over and over again that he is on the other side. I will give him credit for one thing. He makes me think. He makes me think about the part in the oath that I took to defend this nation against "all enemies foreign and domestic" just what consitiutes a domestic enemy. He makes me think that he just might be one.

[JustRalph]

Originally posted by lsbets
Why do I say Amazin's mind is not a reasonable one?

Don't forget...he called for the "hanging" of a sitting President.

hcap:
We can disagree. You article is somewhat accurate. Using military force to squash the chemical weapon problem in Iraq was previously not in our interests. I agree. This time it was very much in our interest. We needed to remind the world that we are capable of kicking everyones ass. We also needed to plant a different type of goverment in the middle east. Mission accomplished. Every asshole dictator or middle east prime minister ( more importantly, anywhere in the world) is now keenly aware that if you push us too far or attack Americans you may end up receiving warm regards from President Bush while being pulled from your Rat Hole somewhere under a farm house. You will be paraded on international television and have your head searched for lice on Tv. You will then end up in a trial somewhere with many nations calling for your hanging.

Don't forget that we went about this war the hard way. We tried like hell to not kill civilians and we went out of our way to sell it. I fault Bush for that. It should have happen much more swiftly and been much more fierce. The U.S. Air Force could have rained fire on everybody from above and the mental effect would have been one that the Arabs would still be reeling from. Before you ask, no I don't care about the civilians. The greater benefit would be worth it in my opine. When a governments actions bring enough damage to the citizens, they will take care of the problem themselves. The Iraqi's would have looked forward (and they will now) and they will never forget what allowing a dictator of this magnitude to rule them, wrought. If the U.S. Air Force would have been unleashed on them, they would have a much clearer vision for the future. I firmly believe that there is only one way to fight a war, all out. Every Government in the World saw what we can do in with a half ass engagement (trying to spare civilians etc) Their war planners and scholars know that we were only partially going at it and we rolled across Iraq in 3 days. Remember, when they sit down to talk about this they will discuss the fact that a very small portion of the might and arsenal of the Air Force and Navy was employed. The big guns of the Navy did very little work in this engagement. Surgical strike weapons and ground troops going in after make for a clean little War. Other countries know this. Hell we didn't try out the new stuff. At least as far as we know. I wanted to see that new gun the Marines have. The one that makes your skin heat up and eventually piss yourself? The sonic weapons etc. Remember there is only one way to fight a war. All out..........but President Bush has set a precedent that needed to be set. Especially in that area of the world. He understands the long term effects. We will be safer for this and Iraq will be better off. End of Story. I bet that is where we disagree.

[boxcar]

hcap supports this maxim with:

Emotionally I am anti war and agree with many sentiments expressed by Amazin about war. Also I may be wrong, but he may also accept war as a last resort.

In most cases, Liberals' emotions are precisely what clogs up their inductive and deductive reasoning abilities. Having said this, however, doesn't imply that some of what Hcap has said doesn't have merit to it. There have been ill-advised and unjust wars, for example, in which we should not have participated. (Vietnam comes to mind, as does Bosnia and Kosovo, etc.)

Insofar, as the U.S. having its share of strange [political] bedfellows in the Middle East (and elsewhere in the world, I might add) shouldn't come as a surprise. This result is practially inevitable whenever we make political choices between two evils. Sometimes the evil we choose doesn't turn out to the lesser of the two. But to spin these political "alliances" as constituting some kind of official U.S. moral endorsement or support of policies of regimes that turned out to be oppressive and tyrannical, I think, is wee bit over the top, in most cases.

Boxcar

[Lefty]

hacap, wrong, wrong, ever so wrong. The war WAS NOT orig. about wmd's, that was just a small part of the overall equation. The war was about Saddam breaking the treaty he made with us after the Gulf War and breaking 17 UN resolutions. When the UN didn't want to act(because France, Germany, and Russia was doing business with Saddam) Bush risked his presidency and took on the monster of Iraq.
Get it right. Stop being disingenous.
Why don't you list the company that was Clinton's biggest contributor and that he allowed them to sell China a missile launching system. That would be useful!

[Lefty]

Btw, Boxcar, right on. After we helped Saddam he invaded Kuwaite and then turned on us completely. All the difference in the world. Trouble is, these libs, think everyyrthing exists in a vacuum and basically, when it comes to the rest of the world, the U.S. is the bad guy. Then when invited to leave, they whine about freespeech and the mean spirited conservatives.

[Amazin]

Tom

If you want to criticize my views,at least get them straight..You are such a tangled ball of confusion I'm not sure where to start.

Lefty

You are absolutely wrong.WMD's was the basis of invading Iraq. You've said in the past you only get your news from 2 sources.Limbaugh on drugs is one of them. That may be your problem.Everyone else knows what the reason was.

JR

Another conservative who can't read.I never "called" for the Hanging of Bush.That's out of context.Reread it. Remember I'm against killing.

CJ

I'd like to make one more clarification on your coward subject even though that subject has nothing to do with this topic and is a redneck conservative tactic.

If an anti war person goes to a military installation and refuses to say something he knows is inflamatory,you consider it cowardly. That's like saying if I saw a cop and you dared me to call him a "pig" then I was a coward. Or if a pack of pit bulls came after me and I ran,I was a coward.

You're confused.That's common sense. Why don't I give you the challenge of going to a black ghetto and yelling the N word. If you don't do it I'm suppose to call you a coward. Let's suppose for a minute you hated black people.Well there are alot of people that do,and they don't go yelling the N word because it's common sense.Not because they are cowards.You should distinguish between stupidity,cowardice and common sense. Courage is something else alltogether.

To all:

If a strong country beats up on a weak country,does that make the winner righteous?Obviously not.That just shows who is the stronger country is,but that doesn't necessarily make them right.

[Lefty]

Amazin, WMD's absolutely WERE NOT the basis of invading Iraq. Quit getting your news from the anti-Bush, anti-conservative left. In the State of THe Union speech wmd's comprised only 16 words of the speech. The basis was those 17 broken resolutions and Saddam's absolute refusal to reply. Get it right.

[Lefty]

amazin, your words: "why don't we capture Bush and hang the hypocrite high?" I did take the liberty of correcting your spelling of hypocrite.
Now you want to back off the statement? I suppose since you posed it as a question you can play the semantics game by saying you didn't advocate it. You are lacking cojones, my friend.

[Lefty]

amazin, after reading your last post I crown you absolute Master of the Flawed Analogyand Absolute Master of misdirection and half-truths. The other liberals ran you a close race, though.

[boxcar]

Lefty wrote:

amazin, your words: "why don't we capture Bush and hang the hypocrite high?" I did take the liberty of correcting your spelling of hypocrite.
Now you want to back off the statement? I suppose since you posed it as a question you can play the semantics game by saying you didn't advocate it. You are lacking cojones, my friend.

This badly misguided soul will probably retort with something along these lines: It depends on what you mean by "hang...high".

This anti-war dove, bleeding heart pacifist, peace-lovin', ever-so-tolerant-towards-all, pathetic soul and poor excuse for a human being and general disgrace to mankind has the audacious temerity to call Bush a "hyprocrite" when he has engaged in all manner of hate speech to describe his sentiments against the president! Little does he know that he is just as much a murderer in his own heart as his bosom buddies Saddam Hussein, the Palestinian sucicide bombers, Al Queda, etc., (all of whom he perpetually has defended and justified their murderous acts), for in the Good Book it is written:

1 John 3:15
15 Everyone who hates his brother is a murderer; and you know that no murderer has eternal life abiding in him.
NAS

While in the context of this passage (and the next one, as well) the Apostle is referring to "brother" as being a fellow-Christian, nonetheless it is not a stretch at all to apply the text to all human kind, since the entire human race is related, as we all share the same origins. This next text, I believe, graphically describes the practical consequences of A-Maze's condition (and all those of his ilk) in that they're totally blinded by their hate, and are perpetually stumbling in their self-imposed darkness.

1 John 2:9-11
9 The one who says he is in the light and yet hates his brother is in the darkness until now. 10 The one who loves his brother abides in the light and there is no cause for stumbling in him. 11 But the one who hates his brother is in the darkness and walks in the darkness, and does not know where he is going because the darkness has blinded his eyes.
NAS

People like A-Maze are to be most pitied.

Boxcar

[ljb]

Lefty,
Methinks thou dost protest too much!
This is a very basic thing.
The current administration, sensing support in the patriotic time after 9/11, conjured some lies to validate the invasion of Iraq.
lie 1. They have wmd
lie 2. They are a threat to our safety
lie 3. They are developing nukes.
Based on these lies and the fear they instilled in unsupecting Americans, they invaded Iraq.
The results being:
Billions of tax dollars spent.
Thousands of lives lost.
A quagmire in Iraq.

On the positive side:
Captured Saddam
Halliburton profits way up.

[Lefty]

ljb, everything you mentioned in last post is just your misguided and misinformed opinion.
read the David Kay report.
When a democracy emerges in Iraq Geo W. Bush will rightfully take his place as one of the greatest Presidents. If a democracy does not ensue it will not be for the lack of this President trying. And he will still get high marks for running the terrorists to the ends of the earth and keeping them out of our "backyard"
We have nothing to fear except a weak Democrat being elected to the Presidency. That fear not valid till 2008. Of course, this all my opinion, but i'd bet i'm closer to the truth than you.

[lsbets]

LJB -
Are you saying that Iraq did not have WMDs? Are you also saying that they did not have a nuclear program? That they did not have trained nuclear scientists working for them?

Even you know the ansers to those questions. The question that you should be asking is what happenned to Iraq's WMDs that the whole world knows they had. Hillary Clinton herself has pointed out that the entire Senate had the same intel that Bush had, and the same intel that her husband had, so that to try and pin a "lie" on Bush is highly disingenuous. It is entirely appropriate to ask what is wrong with our intellignece gathering community that we could have missed Hussein deciding to get rid of the WMDs that we know he did have (even you cannot dispute that he did have them). Maybe he transferred his WMDs somewhere else, maybe he destroyed them, we do not know. What we do know is he did have them and he did use them. That is one fact that is very inconvenient for yoour worldview.

[cj]

Amazin,

Your analogy, as usual, makes no sense. First off, I said you should stand up for something you believe in and do something about it. Spouting off on a horse racing message board isn't going to accomplish much. I wouldn't believe in going to the ghetto and saying the N word. Someone with such beliefs would indeed be a coward if they did not promote these beliefs in front of those they might offend. For the record, I grew up in Baltimore in what most people would consider a ghetto. This is why I chuckled at your "conservative" label that showed once again you know not of what you speak.

Also, I was not implying that you would get your butt kicked if you protested outside a military installation. The passers by would probably just laugh at you as happens anytime I've seen protestors. No animosity, it is their right. I at least give them credit for standing up for what the believe. You have made it clear you would be afraid to take that chance. They are real people. You are a nameless, faceless jerk with nothing better to do with your time. You'd be 1 to 9 to be a draft dodger like your buddy Clinton if you were ever called upon to serve your country. You would definitely have some bridge jumpers in on that bet.

You make assumptions based on what you believe, but as I've shown, you are usually wrong.

Oh, and in the future, feel free to forward your posts to me for any spelling and grammatical errors that need to be fixed. I don't mind helping anyone in this area, especially those pretending to know everything. I know I make some mistakes myself, but I at least try to make my posts presentable.

[hcap]

My friend Boxcar says:
In most cases, Liberals' emotions are precisely what clogs up their inductive and deductive reasoning abilities.
What makes you an "expert" on emotions? Many might think avoiding useless wars is a noble pursuit. Certainly holding in one's heart that aspiration should not be faulted.
And if avoiding war according to you "clogs" ones inductive abilities--what does wanting and seeking war do?

I said some wars are and were wrong, and mentioned Vietnam and The Spanish American War. You mentioned Bosnia and Kosovo. Suprisingly I agree with you. Unfortunately we won't know all of the truth behind the current dog and pony show for many years to come-just like in the Vietnamese and Spanish American wars
Insofar, as the U.S. having its share of strange [political] bedfellows in the Middle East (and elsewhere in the world, I might add) shouldn't come as a surprise. This result is practially inevitable whenever we make political choices between two evils
How about economic choices? Does choosing to support tyrants throughout the world in pursuit of economic gain justify strange bedfellows? 'Cause we slept with and continue to sleep with many.

Why don't you check out the link I posted and carefully look at the buisness deals made by of some of the largest corporations in this country and the world. Or for that matter google for Haliburton and it's subsidiaries selling oil drilling equipment to Saddam when our VP was running that show.

Just when I thought we had in common something, (Bosnia and Kosovo), you go and ruin it all with more biblical cherry picking.
When you play the ponies do you pay more attention to the horses' color than will the horse run a good race today? You can judiciously quote scripture all you want but the Sermon on the Mount will support most anti war "fanatics"

"Blessed are the peacemakers,
For they shall be called sons of God. "

Lefty you are totally wrong as usual
Amazin, WMD's absolutely WERE NOT the basis of invading Iraq. Quit getting your news from the anti-Bush, anti-conservative left. In the State of THe Union speech wmd's comprised only 16 words of the speech. The basis was those 17 broken resolutions and Saddam's absolute refusal to reply. Get it right..
Was get it right an intentional pun?
If so --funny, also you corrected Amazin's spelling of hypocrite..
So if I correct your spelling of "Kuwaite"
Should be Kuwait, are you a "spelling hypocrite?
:cool: :cool:

[Lefty]

No, I am not wrong. But if it takes liberals 20 yrs or a 100 yrs to ascertain the truth then so be it.
BTW, do you work for a corporation? And you do know that a corporation is us, the little piipples with our stock as well as the CEO's. Maybe you're just not that deep a thinker. As most often, Boxcar is right., Liberals make decisions with emotion, more often than not and conservatives try to see the logic, more often than not.
In this complicated world, friends become enemies and enemies become friends. Why are we wrong to put our own interests first?
Do you hand your paycheck over to the family next door or does your own family benefit first and foremost from that paycheck?
ATT: amazin, this is how you do an analogy.

[hcap]

Lefty--

You should re-read 1984.
Maybe the "Ministry of Truth" has done a job on your memory. What's that you say-can't remember where you put your copy?

Let me refresh you about WMDs

Assistant Secretary Wolfowitz
Washington Post
March 30, 2003
"The president has made very clear that the reason why we are in Iraq is to find weapons of mass destruction. The fact that we haven't found them in seven or eight days doesn't faze me one little bit. Very clearly, we need to find this stuff or people are going to be asking questions."

Press Secretary Fleischer
New York Times
April 14, 2003
"We have high confidence that they have weapons of mass destruction. This is what this war was about and is about. And we have high confidence it will be found.

[cj]

People crack me up with the WMD thing! Have you ever been there? It took a long time to find a person in that country, and we know he needed food, water, and air. WMDs do not. They will be found in time, I am certain of that. They are surely very well hidden. Give me a crate of WMDs and a month of time where you can't watch me, and it will take years to find them right here in Oklahoma. If you don't believe Saddam had them, you need to pull your head out of your ass and get some oxygen.

[hcap]

No I haven't been there but maybe our Secretary of defense had some inside info?

Secretary Rumsfeld
ABC "This Week with George Stephanapolous"
March 30, 2003
"If you think – let me take that, both pieces – the area in the south and the west and the north that coalition forces control is substantial. It happens not to be the area where weapons of mass destruction were dispersed. We know where they are. They're in the area around Tikrit and Baghdad and east, west, south and north somewhat.

Or maybe he should pull his head out of his ass--or should that be your ass?
Or maybe Mr Adelman should pull both your heads outa his ass?

Kenneth Adelman, member of Defense Policy Board
Washington Post
April 10, 2003
"With fear of Hussein almost gone, 'people will step forward pretty fast' and identify Iraq's weapons stores, said former Reagan arms official Kenneth Adelman, who serves on the Defense Policy Board. 'It should be pretty soon, in the next five days.

By the way Saddam was a moving target. Changed hideouts every day or even evry few hours. WMDS are fixed and remember there were supposed to be MASSIVE quantities.

I hear their discontinueing David Kays search party. How come?

[Lefty]

hcap, read it and also Orwell's Animal Farm. Read that one.
Hey, i'm going by the State Of The Union Address. I guarantee you we will find them or what happened to them, even though it was not the primay purpose. It may have become a "focused" purpose later when the liberal press beat it to death. Don't you remember the broken treaty and the 17 broken resolutions?
But the argument is quite moot. We are there.
Pick a side. I pick ours.
After listening to a lot of tripe even after Saddam found i'm not convinced that every american is on our side.

[JustRalph]

Originally posted by hcap
No I haven't been there but maybe our Secretary of defense had some inside info? Secretary Rumsfeld
ABC "This Week with George Stephanapolous"
March 30, 2003 "If you think – let me take that, both pieces – the area in the south and the west and the north that coalition forces control is substantial. It happens not to be the area where weapons of mass destruction were dispersed. We know where they are. They're in the area around Tikrit and Baghdad and east, west, south and north somewhat.


3 Weeks later Wolfowitz also mildly confirmed that the rumor that those same weapons he was speaking about in your quote may have been moved to Syria. 2 days later Colin Powell made a quick trip to Syria....for discussions........you act as if the landscape can't change on a daily basis. It can.......

[hcap]

JR

If it were only one incident maybe I would be more willing to accept that some were moved. However when all the bs is weighed and the fact that we had Iraq under surveilance by aircraft and satellite for years before we invaded---
Besides why didn't we watch the "landscape" as we invaded and at least catch some movement of WMDS before they could totally dissapear and now know where some were moved?

President Bush
Interview with TVP, Poland
May 29, 2003
"We found the weapons of mass destruction. We found biological laboratories… They're illegal. They're against the United Nations resolutions, and we've so far discovered two. And we'll find more weapons as time goes on. But for those who say we haven't found the banned manufacturing devices or banned weapons, they're wrong. We found them."

(Turns out these were to produce hydrogen for aerial balloons)

Lt. Gen. James Conway, Commander of the 1 st Marine Expeditionary Force
Los Angeles
Times May 31, 2003
"It was a surprise to me then, it remains a surprise to me now, that we have not uncovered weapons. It's not for lack of trying. We've been to virtually every ammunition supply point between the Kuwaiti border and Baghdad, but they're simply not there."

And of course David Kay after 6 (?) months has found nothing except some botulism toxin in an Iraqi's refrig. Hell, leave a jar of mayo for 6 months in the fridge and you will have the same thing.
His unit is to be discontinued

[Amazin]

Which delusional conservative to respond to.Hmm? Tough one. They keep going round in circles of untruths.I'll try Lefty's brain dead ascertion that WMD's were Not the reson for invasion. This time Lefty,put your glasses on cause this is direct quotes from your Fuhrer's State of the Union Address.

"Our intelligence officials estimate that Saddam Hussein had the materials to produce as much as 500 tons of sarin, mustard and VX nerve agent.”

State of the Union Address – 1/28/2000

“U.S. intelligence indicates that Saddam Hussein
had upwards of 30,000 munitions capable
of delivering chemical agents.”

State of the Union Address – 1/28/2003


“We have also discovered through intelligence
that Iraq has a growing fleet of manned and unmanned aerial vehicles that could be used to disperse chemical or biological weapons across broad areas."

State of the Union Address – 1/28/2003

"Our intelligence sources tell us that he (Saddam) has attempted to purchase high-strength aluminum tubes suitable for nuclear weapons production."

State of the Union Address – 1/28/2003

"Satellite photographs reveal that Iraq is rebuilding facilities at [past nuclear] sites."

Bush speech to the nation – 10/7/2002

"The British government has learned that Saddam Hussein recently sought significant quantities of uranium from Africa."

State of the Union Address – 1/28/2003

"We know he's been absolutely devoted to trying to acquire nuclear weapons, and we believe he has, in fact, reconstituted nuclear weapons."

VP Dick Cheney – “Meet the Press” 3/16/2003

And guess what.Your Fuhrer and his little henchmen all LIED.Do you understand what that means.It means Bush is a liar.I know that was obvious but I can see nothing is obvious to you .
What more evidence do you need for me to prove Bush is a liar?

[shanta]

CAN YOU PLEASE DROP THE "FUHRER" IN YOUR POSTS. EVERYONE IS ENTITLED TO THEIR OPINIONS AND CAN AIR THEM IN AN OPEN FORUM. THAT IS WHAT IS GREAT ABOUT THIS COUNTRY AGREED?
BUT TO ENVOKE THAT "WORD" AND IN ANY WAY TRY TO PIN THAT ON OUR PRESIDENT WELL. ANYWAY CONSIDER YOUR CHOICE OF WORDS . RICHIE

[Secretariat]

Amazin. Those are some damning words. Frankly, I think your allusion to GW and the Fuehrer are distatsteful, alienating, and divisive, and bring out only the worst emotions in all of us.

That said. I have been watching this thread, and did some research on the timeline for these Iraq decisions, and am kind of amazed myself. Trying to find the first time the word democracy for the Iraqi people is used by Bush is tough to find. But fear of WMD's from the "Axis of Evil" (of which Iraq is included) are mentioned as early as Bush's first State of the Union Address. Bush cited intelligence and American national security interests and our need to "pre-empt" regimes which may use them. Attempts were made to work through the UN,, but when Hans Blix basically said that Sadam for the most part was cooperating, things accelerated. From England's perspective it was all about WMd's

Sept 24, 2002 - The UK Guardian

"Mr Blair is confident that the 55-page dossier on weapons of mass destruction will convince many doubters.
He told colleagues: "Saddam is developing his weapons programme and doing it as fast as he can."
He has promised the dossier will not merely be a rebundling of known facts, but "as clear evidence as you could get that he is continuing with his weapons programme. The threat is real serious and continuing".
Mr Blair told colleagues: "If we and the UN move away from this issue, he will develop these weapons and when he can, he will launch an external attack in his neighbourhood."
In the cabinet meeting he said: "We are not talking about historic leftovers but an ongoing, continuing programme."

Things went back and forth, but always at the focus was the WMD program of Sadam, and the threat of terrorism.

It is interesting to review that timeline. I'm glad Saddam is caught. I hope we can move forward. I hope the Iraqi people get to rule thier own country and I hope our boys come home soon.

It is interesting to read this quote from GW Bush's liberal dad though.

Excerpt below is from "Why We Didn't Remove Saddam" by George Bush [Sr.] and Brent Scowcroft, Time (2 March 1998):

While we hoped that popular revolt or coup would topple Saddam, neither the U.S. nor the countries of the region wished to see the breakup of the Iraqi state. We were concerned about the long-term balance of power at the head of the Gulf. Trying to eliminate Saddam, extending the ground war into an occupation of Iraq, would have violated our guideline about not changing objectives in midstream, engaging in "mission creep," and would have incurred incalculable human and political costs. Apprehending him was probably impossible. We had been unable to find Noriega in Panama, which we knew intimately. We would have been forced to occupy Baghdad and, in effect, rule Iraq. The coalition would instantly have collapsed, the Arabs deserting it in anger and other allies pulling out as well. Under those circumstances, furthermore, we had been self-consciously trying to set a pattern for handling aggression in the post-cold war world. Going in and occupying Iraq, thus unilaterally exceeding the U.N.'s mandate, would have destroyed the precedent of international response to aggression we hoped to establish. Had we gone the invasion route, the U.S. could conceivably still be an occupying power in a bitterly hostile land. It would have been a dramatically different--and perhaps barren--outcome.

[hcap]

ERNEST HEMINGWAY once wrote, All modern American literature comes from one book by Mark Twain called Huckleberry Finn.

Early in Twain’s novel, the young boy, Huck Finn, and his friend, Tom Sawyer, decide they will try to become robbers. One day Tom readies an attack on a fabulously wealthy caravan. But when they charge, Huck recounts, "There warn’t no Spaniards and A-rabs, and there warn’t no camels nor no elephants. It warn’t anything but a Sunday-school picnic."

So Huck asks Tom what happened to the caravan, and Tom has a ready answer. He said it was all done by enchantment. He said there was hundreds of soldiers there, and elephants and treasure, and so on, but we had enemies which he called magicians; and they had turned the whole thing into an infant Sunday-school, just out of spite. I said, all right; then the thing for us to do was to go for the magicians. Tom Sawyer said I was a numskull.

I guess the WMDs were hidden by enchantment., and that old Saddam -what a magician!


"If the cause be not good, the king himself hath a heavy reckoning to make; when all those legs and arms and heads, chopped off in a battle, shall join together at the latter day, and cry all 'We died at such a place;' some swearing, some crying for a surgeon, some upon their wives left poor behind them, some upon the debts they owe, some upon their children rawly left.

I am afeard there are few die well that die in a battle: for how can they charitably dispose of anything when blood is their argument! Now, if these men do not die well, it will be a black matter for the king that led them to it.

- Wm. Shakespeare, in King Henry V

[lsbets]

Hcap,

I will ask you what I have asked the rest of your crowd, but none of you have answered:

Are you saying that Iraw never had WMDs?

Given the fact that we all know he did, and we had intel going back through the Clinton years to the same effect, don't you think that it is more an issue of faulty intelligence rather than one side or the other lying. The Democrats who voted for the war all did so based on intel reports going back to the first Gulf War. The reports did not change once Bush came in office. Remember, we bombed them pretty good in 98 based on similar intel. Did Clinton lie to us then? No, he acted on the intelligence that he had.

We have learned over the past 3 years that our intelligence gathering capabilities are severly diminished. That is a problem that we need to address, but it seems that you are not interested in fixing any problems, you and your 2 friends are only interested in bashing Bush. You are so blinded by hatred that you cannot see reality. Its pretty sad.

[hcap]

Isbets

I will respond. Unfortunately not tonight.
I am not dodging the issue, just no time at the moment.

Let's just say for now I beleive if there are WMDS, the quantities were greatly exagerated as was their threat. Similiar to the so called "drones" that the British claimed could be launched "within 45 minutes". Turned out to be made of balsa wood -like a model airplane.

Tommorow
hcap

[Tom]

Long time no posts.
Welcome back to the jungle <G>
I read you list of companies that did business with Sodamn with great interest. I am assuming that his rat-hole hideout was built by "Mouse Master!"

:eek:

[Lefty]

We are there. If Bush is a liar so was Clinton. I know you guys hate bush for no rational reason other than he is a Republican. WMD's were only a small part of invading Iraq but you want to make it the whole ballgame. So be it. Hcap, i'm amazed that you minimize the Kay report and think a few little nasty germs no big deal. On fox news they are saying they found missles with canisters attached that were for saran gas. But what's a little gas between friends? Continue your hate parade. But will tyou really feel safer with Howard Dean at the helm?
Scares the hell out of me.

[Lefty]

amazin, yes and that's true. He had saran gas. He used it on the Kurds! Where you been. Kay's report details chemical weapons. And still you liberals not happy. Why? You hate republcans pure and simple.
Your calling the ptresident Fuhrer shows what a vile hateful man you are.
But I guess in your next post you'll deny saying it.
Does Clinton have a school out there somewhere that you attend?

[Amazin]

Lefty


To my knowledge,no chemical weapons have been found. He was previously supplied with chemical agents from the U.S. in the Iran war. Poor excuse for invading a country when you gave him the weapons in the first place.

[Amazin]

Boxcar,Lefty and JR

Looks like I have to explain everything.This was my quote regarding "hanging Bush"

Lynch mob mentality rules this board. Bush killed more innocent Iraqi's than 9/11 killed innocent Americans in the name of Iraqi freedom .Why don't we capture Bush and hang the hypocryte high.Oh... like some distinguished guests on this board have said,"we are the good guys'. That's right,keep telling yourself that as Cheney's Hallibuton overcharges the government and taxpayers by 61 million...."

It was a sarcastic method of busting up the lynch mob posts that were pointing fingers at one murderer and ignoring the other.Like Bush said"mission accomplished"

[Amazin]

Boxcar

Why are you giving me those quotes from the bible.You need them for yourself.I am against war and murder.It is you who wants to justify war and murder.

[Amazin]

CJ Quote:

"I wouldn't believe in going to the ghetto and saying the N word. Someone with such beliefs would indeed be a coward if they did not promote these beliefs in front of those they might offend. "

Has it ever occured to you that what you percieve as cowardice is actually consideration of other people's feeling and that it is not allways appropriate to say what you feel?

[lsbets]

I don't think you have ever made me laugh so hard Amazin. That last post of yours might just be the dumbest thing you ever said. If a white supremecist walked through a ghetto and did not yell the N word at any African American that he saw, it would not be out of cowardice, but because he was being considerate of their feelings. LOL. Thats a good one.

[Richard]

Right or wrong,right or left,I'm glad he was caught.And like so many other one-time powerful despots,he was reduced to a nobody in the end.

[Lefty]

amazin, where should I start? You give me sio much. About you saying to hang Bush. Sure it was sarcastic, but you still said it.
About the chemical agents we gave Saddam. I guess I have to keep repeating myself. Priorties change. Former allies become enemies.
You say you are against killing but have no compunction against calling a good and just man vile names.
Go to Iraq and tell the people there that Bush is a killer and should have left Saddam alone. I'll bet the hang YOU.

[wolsons]

I don't usually post here, though I've been lurking for quite a while.

Short and sweet, what is the point of this thread going on from here? There is NO chance that either side has any chance of convincing the other side that they are wrong, so why keep going back and forth on this? Amazin has no chance to bring me over to his side of the argument, since I consider the very foundation of his arguments to be in error, but I also understand that he feels just as strongly about his position, and nothing I or anyone else says is going to sway him either.

It's a free country, and we all have the right to express our opinions, but to keep repeating them endlessly to each other is pointless.

Just my opinion, of course :D

Steve

[JustRalph]

It is winter time and we are having so much fun!!!!! why not participate in a little debate. it is good for the mind........but you are right, It is a little old......Amazin and LBJ haven't said anything different in the last 6 months. ...............

[cj]

Originally posted by Amazin
CJ Quote:

Has it ever occured to you that what you percieve as cowardice is actually consideration of other people's feeling and that it is not allways appropriate to say what you feel?

Is it consideration of over a million people in the military's feelings when you bash us and call us killers? Probably just me, but wouldn't that be a little hypocritical on your part?

By the way, occurred, perceived and always look a little better in print. Pretty sad a person like yourself couldn't learn to spell better than an inner city boy like me. We are finished, please drive thru!

[boxcar]

hcap opines with:

My friend Boxcar says:

What makes you an "expert" on emotions?

Who needs to be an "expert" on emotions to understand that when one starts thinking with his "feelings" instead of his God-given mind (which was given for the purpose of engaging in thinkingl activities), chances are many that the more visceral types will overlook (intentionally or unintentionally, btw) very important considerations in the decision-making process.

Many might think avoiding useless wars is a noble pursuit. Certainly holding in one's heart that aspiration should not be faulted.

You won't get an argument from me, my friend. But your statement begs the question, since we, evidently, don't agree that this particular war was "useless".

And if avoiding war according to you "clogs" ones inductive abilities--what does wanting and seeking war do?

Nice bit of syllogism on your part, Hcap. (I would have thought better of you.) I never said "avoiding war" clogs one's reasoning or thinking abilities. Rather, what I basically said was that injecting one's emotions into the decsion-making process in a big way will certainly cloud over anyone's thought processes.

Moreover, I don't think this present administion, and certainly not this writer, has ever said that we "wanted" war or was actively seeking it. What you seem to have conveniently overlooked here is that human behavior (on all scales) is not only dictated by our wants, but by our b]needs[/b] (perceived or real), as well.

I said some wars are and were wrong, and mentioned Vietnam and The Spanish American War. You mentioned Bosnia and Kosovo. Suprisingly I agree with you.

I also mentioned Vietnam in addition to Bosnia and Kosovo. None of these wars were critical to our national security interests, therefore, we shouldn't have fought them.

How about economic choices? Does choosing to support tyrants throughout the world in pursuit of economic gain justify strange bedfellows? 'Cause we slept with and continue to sleep with many.

Hmm...are you advocating isolationism? Should we tell all dictators and autocrats to kiss off? Don't call us, we'll call you?

Why don't you check out the link I posted and carefully look at the buisness deals made by of some of the largest corporations in this country and the world. Or for that matter google for Haliburton and it's subsidiaries selling oil drilling equipment to Saddam when our VP was running that show.

Ha, ha. It's the capitalisitic way! If U.S. corporations don't pursue these profitable ventures, then other countries will, anyway. But seriously...no prez, since God-knows-when, has advocated isolationism. Vvery tough choices have been made over numerous decades in trying to decide between the lesser of two evils. Personally, I would favor some isolationism and wouldn't mind the U.S. officially thumbing its nose at most dictators and autocrats, most especially of the commie stripe. But even then, this strategy wouldn't please many Libs because they'd argue that we should be keeping the door open with these despots, and dialogue with them, and trade with them, etc., etc., etc. -- because someday our capitalistic ideals could rub off on them somehow, and we'll convert them by osmosis, perhaps, to our democratic way of life.

Just when I thought we had in common something (Bosnia and Kosovo), you go and ruin it all with more biblical cherry picking.
When you play the ponies do you pay more attention to the horses' color than will the horse run a good race today? You can judiciously quote scripture all you want but the Sermon on the Mount will support most anti war "fanatics"

You call it "cherry picking", but I tell you a truth: You'd be very, very hard-pressed to find so much as one verse in the bible whereby Jesus waxed political. Jesus didn't come into the world to transform nations. He came to change individuals.

"Blessed are the peacemakers, For they shall be called sons of God. "

The problem with this verse is that anti war "fanatics" take it out of context. Even a cursory reading of the Sermon will reveal that Jesus was addressing Jews (both his disciples and unbelievers) and was instructing individuals how to enter into the Kingdom of Heaven. He wasn't instructing nations on how to enter into his Kingdom!

Additionally, other portions of scripture would contradict the "fanatics'" convenient interpretation of this one verse. I would refer you, for example, to Jesus' Mt. Olivet Discourse late in his ministry, cf. Mat. 241:ff.

The Book of Revelation in the N.T. bears witness to Jesus' teaching about the turmoil the world would be in these latter days, as does the O.T. prophet Daniel.

Standing in sharp contrast to these kinds of passages that deal with this present age are the Eternal Kingdom passages that clearly teach that warfare will be no more after Christ returns, judges the world and creates the New Heavens and New Earth in which his redeemed people (from every nation under the sun) will reign with him forever and ever. In Rev. 21, you can read about the nations and kings living in complete harmony with one another, etc.

A parallell O.T. eschatological passage to Rev. 21 also bears out this truth in the context of nations in the Eternal Kingdom . I will now quote that passage at some length:

Isa 2:1-4
2:1 The word which Isaiah the son of Amoz saw concerning Judah and Jerusalem.
2 Now it will come about that In the last days,The mountain of the house of the LORDWill be established as the chief of the mountains,And will be raised above the hills; And all the nations will stream to it. 3 And many peoples will come and say, "Come, let us go up to the mountain of the LORD, To the house of the God of Jacob; That He may teach us concerning His ways, And that we may walk in His paths."For the law will go forth from Zion, And the word of the LORD from Jerusalem. 4 And He will judge between the nations,And will render decisions for many peoples; And they will hammer their swords into plowshares, and their spears into pruning hooks. Nation will not lift up sword against nation, And never again will they learn war.
NAS

The above passage is not describing conditions in this age, but rather in the age to come...the Eternal Kingdom Age. It's only in these kinds of Kingdom passages that you will find clear references to "nations" not waging war with one another ever again.

Again, we can further reference to this Eternal Kingdom Age (New Heavens and New Earth) in chapter 65 of the same O.T. book.

Hope you don't mind the abbreviated bible study. Yes, I might "cherry-pick" texts to make a point, but I never take those passages out of their contexts. Never! Nor will I ever. You can bank on it.

Boxcar

[hcap]

Isbets

Here are some of my reasons to suspect the threat of WMDs were exagerated.

The US was providing its intelligence to the UN Inspection Teams. And the UN Teams could not verify the information on inspection and did not find any of it credible. If we had knowledge of specific locations where WMD might be found, why couldn't we have provided these locations to the inspection teams as GPS coordinates without revealing intel sources or methods?

BERLIN, Jan 7: Citing UN sources in New York, the paper said Blix would tell a closed-door session of the UN security council that such claims - notably from the United States - remain unproven.
The UN Monitoring, Verification and Inspection Commission (UNMOVIC) head will say that neither his nor the International Atomic Energy Agency's (IAEA) inspectors have found proof of weapons of mass destruction, nor of the rockets to deliver them. They also have not found evidence of any active programme to develop them, according to the report.-AFP

Intelligence documents that U.S. and British governments said were strong evidence that Iraq was developing nuclear weapons have been dismissed as forgeries by U.N. weapons inspectors.

“ No evidence establishing such a link has been offered. The New York Times reported on February 9, 2003 that intelligence officials have "pointed out that neither the Bush administration nor the British government, which has also championed the Qaeda-Baghdad connection, has produced direct evidence of Iraqi involvement with the terrorist network." See also: "Allies Find No Links Between Iraq, Al Qaeda," Los Angeles Times, November 4, 2002; "Terrorism experts doubt bin Laden, Baghdad link," Toronto Globe and Mail, February 6, 2003.” http://www.accuracy.org/press_releases/PR031803.htm

In addition, reports of the administration pressuring the intelligence community to falsify the their case, doesn’t exactly help.
C.I.A. Aides Feel Pressure in Preparing

Iraqi Reports By JAMES RISEN
WASHINGTON, March 22 — The recent disclosure that reports claiming Iraq tried to buy uranium from Niger were based partly on forged documents has renewed complaints among analysts at the C.I.A. about the way intelligence related to Iraq has been handled, several intelligence officials said.
Analysts at the agency said they had felt pressured to make their intelligence reports on Iraq conform to Bush administration policies.
For months, a few C.I.A. analysts have privately expressed concerns to colleagues and Congressional officials that they have faced pressure in writing intelligence reports to emphasize links between Saddam Hussein's government and Al Qaeda.http://www.nytimes.com/2003/03/23/international/worldspecial/23CIA.html?ex=1049379077&ei=1&en=ee77c3c46cfa8c47

And
CIA Feels Heat on Iraq Data October 11, 2002
WASHINGTON -- Senior Bush administration officials are pressuring CIA analysts to tailor their assessments of the Iraqi threat to help build a case against Saddam Hussein, intelligence and congressional sources said.

In what sources described as an escalating "war," top officials at the Pentagon and elsewhere have bombarded CIA analysts with criticism and calls for revisions on such key questions as whether Iraq has ties to the Al Qaeda terrorist network, sources said

And further, much of what Powell used to support the US case at the UN is also in doubt. The British paper cited by Powell as clear evidence is mostly plagiarized. And uses info many years old. See
Britain's Iraq Dossier Plagiarized, Outdated http://www.theolympian.com/home/news/20030207/frontpage/23539.shtml

And manipulation of the media and the public

http://www.prwatch.org/prwissues/2002Q4/war.html
"From a marketing point of view, you don't introduce new products in August," White House Chief of Staff Andrew H. Card Jr. told the New York Times in September.
And
“According to the New York Times, intensive planning for the "Iraq rollout" began in July. Bush advisers checked the Congressional calendar for the best time to launch a "full-scale lobbying campaign." The effort started the day after Labor Day as Congress reconvened and Congressional leaders received invitations to the White House and the Pentagon for Iraq briefings with Vice President Dick Cheney, Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld and CIA director George Tenet. White House communications aides scouted locations for the President's September 11 address, which served as a prelude to his militaristic speech to the United Nations Security Council. “

And where did we get a good deal of info?

Much of the pro-war information cited by the White House comes from the Iraqi National Congress (INC), a front group established in the early 1990s by the Rendon Group. (PR Watch's Fourth Quarter 2001 issue detailed the Rendon Group's role in creating the INC.)

If you want, I'll post more...
Such as the famous "Waldorf Documents", where Powell before presenting his speech to the UN, in a secret meeting with Jack Straw in the Waldorf Astoria, examined the so-called proof and threw the documents in the air shouting "bullshit!"

Now I am not saying Iraq had no WMDs at some earlier point in time, but it appeared to many of us in the anti war crowd whatever existed just before the war WAS exagerated.
Why not let the UN inspectors continue?
Maybe the fact that they were coming up zilch was not exactly what Bush and company wanted or expected.
Why rush to war?
At least give it more time!

[hcap]

Hello Tom. Missed your absurd but funny comments. What jungle?

Boxcar, I hope we don't have another "We never said Imminent" debate.
Can't spend the time to seriously deconstruct your well thought out but fallacious arguments.

Later

[Amazin]

CJ Quote:"Is it consideration of over a million people in the military's feelings when you bash us and call us killers? Probably just me, but wouldn't that be a little hypocritical on your part?"

What do you call it when the military kills someone,like a grandmother or 9 year old boy in Iraq?

BTW the military's "don't ask don't tell" homophobic policy and the military's personel subordination to higher ups means you not only are a coward according to your sweeping generalization of what a coward is,but you live the life of a coward and the entire military industrial complex is a cowardly institution.

Before you re-argue the above, it was to make a point.That if you kill someone or punch a person in the nose because they disagree with you doesn't make you a man. It only shows what a jerk you are.

You want to know what a man is? You want to know what courage is? It's facing yourself with honesty. Sounds simple to someone who's never tried it. That takes guts,and many times, years to face up to who you might be. The scariest thing you'll ever see is inside you.It takes a real man to face it.

If you are pro war,you haven't faced yourself or only on a shallow level.How do I know? Because if you did,you would know why it is wrong to kill.

[lsbets]

Amazin, all i can say after reading your last post is you have once again proven what an idiot you are. If I were on the left I would pray that you would shut your mouth because all you do is make your side sound like a bunch of morons.

[Lefty]

amazin, you are one mixed up guy. Trying to pin the don't ask don't tell on an individual military combatent is the cheapest of cheap shots. CJ nor any other military man instituted the "don't ask don't tell" policy. It was none other than your revered Bill Clinton.

Nobody on this board said they were pro war. Let's get that straight. There are many of us who reaLize that there is real evil in the world and that we have 2 choices. Fight for our freedom or sit idly by and be conquered. For some reason you just can't wrap yourselves around that idea, choosing instead to believe America is the blame. I really do despise americans such as you that sit in this country, enjoy all the freedoms, and then disdain the ones that have brought you that freedom.
Cj, Ls bets and all other military personell on this board, I thank you for your service to this country.

[Amazin]

Lefty quote:"Fight for our freedom or sit idly by and be conquered."

By who? Give me a break. Is an ant a threat to a Lion?

[boxcar]

Lefty wrote:

Cj, Ls bets and all other military personell on this board, I thank you for your service to this country.

Here's my heartiest AMEN to that!

Boxcar

[Lefty]

amazin, remember 9-11? If the ants unite they are a big threat.
Do you really want this country to s=tand idly by and let fanatics like Hussein and Bin Laden build up chemical and nuclear weapons and take out millions before we act? Evidently you do. You have demonstrated your hatred for all this country stands for, its military and the brave men and women in the military. Like I said before, your rhetoric demonstrates you are more in sympathy with the likes of Hussein and Bin Laden and that's sad.

[lsbets]

ask Dave Schwartz, he will tell you how powerful ants can be :)

[Amazin]

Boxcar:

With all you biblical rhetoric,would Jesus join the military or drop bombs?Quote me that from the good book.

Lefty:

Your paranoi of ants is mind boggling.

[Lefty]

I guess I just dreamed 9-11. Gosh, it was so real!

[boxcar]

Mr. Maze writes:

Boxcar:

With all you biblical rhetoric,would Jesus join the military or drop bombs?Quote me that from the good book.

No...Jesus was in the soul-saving business. His mission on earth was neither political or social in nature.

But now Mr. Know-it-All, Wise guy, I have a question for you:

Assuming that Jesus is who he claims to be, i.e. the Son of God -- omniscient and omnipotent, and all loving, why hasn't he put an end to all conflicts in this age, since it's in his power to do so if he were so disposed? Why, instead, did he prophesy that wars would continue right up to the end of this age?

Matt 24:3-9
3 And as He was sitting on the Mount of Olives, the disciples came to Him privately, saying, "Tell us, when will these things be, and what will be the sign of Your coming, and of the end of the age?" 4 And Jesus answered and said to them, "See to it that no one misleads you. 5 "For many will come in My name, saying, 'I am the Christ,' and will mislead many. 6 "And you will be hearing of wars and rumors of wars; see that you are not frightened, for those things must take place, but that is not yet the end. 7 "For nation will rise against nation, and kingdom against kingdom, and in various places there will be famines and earthquakes. 8 "But all these things are merely the beginning of birth pangs.
NAS

And er...don't forget to quote me chapter and verse, sir, as I have.

Boxcar

[cj]

Despite our differing views on the military, I should thank you for paying my salary and funding my retirement with your tax dollars (if you have a job.) Of course, if you don't like that, you could leave. It must suck to live in a country where you must pay for things with which you are so strongly opposed.

[Amazin]

Boxcar asked:"Assuming that Jesus is who he claims to be, i.e. the Son of God -- omniscient and omnipotent, and all loving, why hasn't he put an end to all conflicts in this age, since it's in his power to do ..."

I have personally asked god this question.And i got an answer.I was shown a tree.I was told that the tree did not just appear with a snap of the fingers.It took time and struggle and nurturing to grow this tree.This is the nature of this physical world we live in. The same with man's realization of who he is and his relation with others.It takes time to develop and bear fruit.

[Lefty]

amazin, and did God tell you that he helps those who help themselves and that you better damn well be prepared to fight for freedom and fight to keep it?

[boxcar]

The Maze wrote:

Boxcar asked:"Assuming that Jesus is who he claims to be, i.e. the Son of God -- omniscient and omnipotent, and all loving, why hasn't he put an end to all conflicts in this age, since it's in his power to do ..."

[b]I have personally asked god this question.And i got an answer.I was shown a tree.I was told that the tree did not just appear with a snap of the fingers.It took time and struggle and nurturing to grow this tree.This is the nature of this physical world we live in. The same with man's realization of who he is and his relation with others.It takes time to develop and bear fruit.

That's nice...but man is not going to evolve into something better. God must be very confused if he told you that because that would contradict what his son taught in his Mt. Olivet Discourse to his disciples. Jesus didn't teach them that mankind would "develop" or evolve into something good that would bear good fruit. If the world, on the whole, had that kind of moral/spiritual capacity, why did Jesus prophecy that wars would continue right to the end of the age...and tell them that those things "must come to past"!?

And may I remind you that Jesus' predictions about wars was right on the mark? How many wars do you think have been fought since his day until now? (If you can count them, then you can count the stars in the heavens, also!)

It's no wonder at all that you had this private revelation from God, since you, evidently, can't find so much as a single scripture to support your loony theory.

Boxcar

[Amazin]

Boxcar quote"It's no wonder at all that you had this private revelation from God, since you, evidently, can't find so much as a single scripture to support your loony theory."

Plenty to support my experience in the bible. Try this for starters:

The kingdom of God cometh not with observation; neither shall they say, Lo here! or, Lo there! For behold, the kingdom of God is within you. (Luke 17:20-21)]

Lefty Quote:"
amazin, and did God tell you that he helps those who help themselves and that you better damn well be prepared to fight for freedom and fight to keep it?"

Sorry lefty.I think he was reffering to all us non-war types when he said"the meek shall inherit the earth"

[JustRalph]

I started this thread.................


Pa can you please kill it...............when the chapter and verse start flying around........we have drilled down as far as we can!

[hcap]

David Kay is bowing out of the search for WMDs for------

"personal and family reasons, officials said. "

How come? DUH!!!

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A9823-2003Dec17.html

[Lefty]

amazin, look at the parts of the world where the dictators rule the meek. You can spout your pacifist nonsense in a coiuntry where others fight the battles to keep you free, with no consequence. Move your tack to a third world country and spout your nonsense and then i will deem you a brave and sincere man.
This business if we lay down our arms and play nicey nice just does not work in a world filled with evil. And that's the problem with the liberal thinking.
I used to think just like you do, amazin; but I was 5 years old!

[wes]

amazin

When will the wheels break off of your manure wagon?????

wes

[Amazin]

Lefty


One thing you and others on this board have never understood about me is though I am against war,I am not against injustice. I will stand against it with tenacity like a MF. This just happens to be an unjust war.

[Lefty]

amazin, if you have been misunderstood then it's because of your own rhetoric. Words like, and I paraphrase, "soldiers would be convicted of murder in a court of law."
You say this is an unjust war. So, then you would rather for Saddam to still be in power; doing his killing, doing his raping and plotting against the U.S. while the U. N. keeps drawing meaningless lines in the sand?

[lsbets]

Lefty, don't forget his latest assertion that soldiers are cowards. He has not been misunderstood. He stands firmly in the camp of Americas enemies. He can try and repair his reputation, but he has made enough statements supporting terrorists and suicide bombers and condemning our soldiers and any efforts that we make to defeat our enemies, that it is clear to me he is against us.

[Lefty]

Lsbets, I think he has made himself clear. I totally agree with you.
Anything I write on this board, I usually get a chance to also say in public. When i'm at the racebook I speak out when someone opens his mouth and criticizes this war or the president. I have the courage of my convictions. I wonder if amazin is courageous enough to spout his convictions out loud in a crowded room?

[wolsons]

I hope you meant that you are not "FOR" injustice...

Steve

[wolsons]

I was referring to Amazins statement below:

"Lefty


One thing you and others on this board have never understood about me is though I am against war,I am not against injustice."


Steve

[Amazin]

Wolsons:

That was a bit confusing,but your first statement is correct.


Lefty

When I go to the racetrack,I don't want to talk politics. You're doing the CJ coward crap again. It's not because I'm a coward(that is getting boring to say).It's because there is an appropriate time and place to voice my opinion. Most people at a racetrack go there to play the horses,not get into a debate,myself included.

[Lefty]

can you say, "copout?" Maybe you're like a couple friends of mine can't talk and look at the drf at the same time. Someone brings it up i'm not afraid to voice my opinion. BTW, you called everyone in the military a coward. If there is a coward among us it's not the guys in the military.

[Tom]

Originally posted by Amazin
Boxcar:
With all you biblical rhetoric,would Jesus join the military or drop bombs?Quote me that from the good book.


...an eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth.....????

[boxcar]

Amazin wrote:

Plenty to support my experience in the bible. Try this for starters:

The kingdom of God cometh not with observation; neither shall they say, Lo here! or, Lo there! For behold, the kingdom of God is within you. (Luke 17:20-21)

Shirley U. Jest. This text has about as much relevance to wars in this age as would Nebuchadnezzar's influence in the U.N. today.

The Maze continues:
Sorry lefty.I think he was reffering to all us non-war types when he said"the meek shall inherit the earth"

No, you're not thinking. You're guessing. You're hoping against hope. You're desparately grasping at straws.

The word rendered "meek" in many versions of the bible comes from the Greek word "praus" or "praos". It denotes "gentle, mild, meek or humble".
For your info, Jesus referred to himself as being "meek and lowly" (cf. Mat. 11:29), yet this was the same Jesus who frequently used scathing, condemning and judgmental language toward the hyprocritical religious leaders of his day. And the same Jesus who overturned the tables in the temple court and drove out the money changers with whips because they turned his Father's house into a den of thieves.

Go meditate and chew on this for a while and come back and tell me about more of your "experiences" in the bible.

Boxcar

[hcap]

Got a question.
Saddam is captured hiding out in a hole, living yards away in a primitive hut.
His beard is very long and has a lot of grey-but....

Somehow this man, whoever he is, has carefully DYED HIS HAIR and EYEBROWS black very shortly before his 'capture!!
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/pics/15saddammouth.JPG

Look at the photo, there are no grey/white roots anywhere. NONE.
Other photos in the news show the same.

If he had been trying for an honest, intelligent disguise, he would have stopped dying his hair and eyebrows...in fact, he probably would have encouraged the white-haired look.

WHAT WAS A MULTI-BILLIONAIRE STILL DOING AFTER 8 MONTHS IN IRAQ HIDING OUT IN A TINY HOLE? Even a poverty stricken common criminal can give himself a new identity with a different appearance for a few hundred or a few thousand buck, depending how sophisticated you'd like to change your identity and HOW MUCH MONEY YOU HAVE.

Vanity, possibly, but eating candy bars for lunch and dinner and yet getting hair dye and touching up on evidently a regular basis, doesn't make a lot of sense.

Saddam did dye his hair

http://www.heraldonline.com/iraq/iraqss/story/2353237p-2197130c.html
http://www.theadvertiser.news.com.au/common/story_page/0,5936,8187134%255E20221,00.html

[JustRalph]

http://www.thesun.co.uk/article/0,,2-2003583553,00.html

The BBC and Saddam ...................

Hcap you are reading far too many of those Demo underground sites. He was in a farm house with a hole to run to. Get over it.

[hcap]

Ralph I WAS over it until I looked at all the photos.

Care to comment on the specifics of my post? Not saying a conspiracy, but it does seem odd.

[boxcar]

'Cap you don't have to say the "c" word, for your post clearly implies it. But indulge me for a moment so I can feed your paranoia and thereby toss you into a theorizing frenzy.

We didn't capture Saddam. We "captured" one of his body doubles -- actually someone we're paying very well to pose as the real McCoy and to play along with our little deception. In fact, we're paying his family so well that he has agreed to be tried, convicted, sentenced and eventually executed on Saddam's behalf. (Also, we guaranteed this guy in writing that upon his death, the U.S. has prearranged with Allah to have him ushered into the presence of 70 of the most Beautiful Virgins imaginable!) We're playing the game so well right now that, thus far, we have the whole world (save for you and and Democratic Underground) believing that we actually caught The Rat. My prediction is that Bush and Blair will be pull this off and never be found out.

There. Now I've said on your behalf what you're too "shy" to say on this forum.

Ciao,
Boxcar

[hcap]

Not all paranoia is paranoia. Sometimes THERE really is something to fear.

I agree it is a stretch, but considering how much of the media is massaged, why wouldn't any rational being be wary of government and media pablum.

Remember how we we were told the health hazards in lower New York after 9/11 were nothing to worry about?
Do you believe the "single bullet" theory of the Warren Comm?
The entire Vietnamese war was sort of a conspiracy of silence until Ellsburg leaked it to the press.

Or have you heard this one

Operation Northwoods
http://abcnews.go.com/sections/us/DailyNews/jointchiefs_010501.html

NEW YORK, May 1 — In the early 1960s, America's top military leaders reportedly drafted plans to kill innocent people and commit acts of terrorism in U.S. cities to create public support for a war against Cuba
Code named Operation Northwoods, the plans reportedly included the possible assassination of Cuban émigrés, sinking boats of Cuban refugees on the high seas, hijacking planes, blowing up a U.S. ship, and even orchestrating violent terrorism in U.S. cities.
The plans were developed as ways to trick the American public and the international community into supporting a war to oust Cuba's then new leader, communist Fidel Castro.
America's top military brass even contemplated causing U.S. military casualties, writing: "We could blow up a U.S. ship in Guantanamo Bay and blame Cuba," and, "casualty lists in U.S. newspapers would cause a helpful wave of national indignation.
...........
The plans had the written approval of all of the Joint Chiefs of Staff and were presented to President Kennedy's defense secretary, Robert McNamara, in March 1962. But they apparently were rejected by the civilian leadership and have gone undisclosed for nearly 40 years.
These were Joint Chiefs of Staff documents. The reason these were held secret for so long is the Joint Chiefs never wanted to give these up because they were so embarrassing.

I am not ready to accept Saddam as an imposter yet-but but IT DOES SEEM ODD.

[Amazin]

Re: HCAP point of government abuse on own citizens:

Double crossing it's own citizens has been a theme in the U.S. government.The CIA slipped LSD into the drink of Frank Olsen in 1953 who jumped out of a N.Y hotel window to his death.Many key witnesses dissapeared in the Kennedy assasination investigation.The Army has tested biological warfare on it's own citizens at various times in the past,resulting in a bill prohibiting such actions.There have been hundreds of human radiation experiments associated with the Department of Energy such as injecting plutonium in Americans without their knowledge.Etc.Etc.With that kind of a PP's just for starters,I wouldn't underestimate this government with a mom and apple pie belief in everything they tell you be it about Sadamm or how Genetically modified foods are harmless.

Boxcar:

If you see a contradiction in Jesus being "humble" and "pissed off" that's your misperception. Your concept, like those on this board who call pacifists cowards is erroneous. He was consistent to his ideology. You just think he should act in a certain way. He was beyond your box.

[Tom]

This idea reminds me that nowadays, when everyone has camcorders at the ready, we never hear about UFOs anymore.
A good conspiracy needs a fertile mind to grow in.
Amazin is probably proof that the gov't is not responsible for the things he mentions in his post....if it were really in that sort of business, wouldn't HE have disappeared long ago? :rolleyes:

[boxcar]

The Maze writes:

Boxcar:

If you see a contradiction in Jesus being "humble" and "pissed off" that's your misperception. Your concept, like those on this board who call pacifists cowards is erroneous. He was consistent to his ideology. You just think he should act in a certain way. He was beyond your box.

John 2:15-17
15 And He made a scourge of cords, and drove them all out of the temple, with the sheep and the oxen; and He poured out the coins of the moneychangers, and overturned their tables; 16 and to those who were selling the doves He said, "Take these things away; stop making My Father's house a house of merchandise." 17 His disciples remembered that it was written, "Zeal for Thy house will consume me."
NAS

While we don't know if he actually struck anyone, since this text nor any of the parallell passages that speak to this incident in the temple (cf. Mat. 21:12, Mk. 11:15) don't say, nonetheless the distinct possibility exists. For example, Jesus in the Book of Revelation (and elsewhere in the bible) is spoken of a "consuming fire" who will pour his wrath out upon his adversaries during the Great Tribulation period, and is often portrayed as a conquering king making war against those enemies. But the mere fact that he even threatened to strike anyone with those "cords" is certainly the not pacificist way. Sitting down and trying to negotiate a deal or at least trying to talk some sense into the offenders would have been much more in line with pacifisim. Just ask that good ol' Peanut Farmer and Grand Appeaser who believed he could negotiate deals with the devil if need be.

Boxcar

[hcap]

Still not sure what to make of the "alledged capture of Saddam", but here is some more.

From
http://globalresearch.ca/articles/CRG312B.html

Captured

http://globalresearch.ca/articles/capturedsaddamhoax.jpg

"The above is the US occupation forces' just released photograph of who they claim is Saddam Hussein. Notice four "tell tale" details that raise serious questions concerning who this man really is. First, notice the dark birthmark just above and to the left of this man's left eye and especially its position and size. Secondly, notice his right side of his hairline. Thirdly, notice the shape of his chin. Furthly notice the size and shape of his left eye. Now compare these details to two pictures of the real Saddam below:"

Real Saddam

http://globalresearch.ca/articles/realsaddam2.jpg
http://globalresearch.ca/articles/realsaddam1.jpg

"Look at the three photographs of known Saddam Hussein's doubles below. The first Saddam Hussein even "fooled" Kofi Annan of the United Nations but look at this Saddam's refined nose and compare it to "bulbouse nose" of the captured Iraqi alleged to be the Saddam Hussein."

Doubles

http://globalresearch.ca/articles/saddamkdouble.jpg
http://globalresearch.ca/articles/saddamdouble2.jpg
http://globalresearch.ca/articles/saddambefore3.jpg

"Mr. Ahmed, an athlete who knew Mr. Hussein's oldest son Uday personally, says he is positive the person the United States is parading as their prize catch is not the former dictator. Mr. Hussein is known to have a tiny tattoo on his left hand, but in the relentlessly replayed video that shows him having his throat checked by a U.S. Army medic — the video that most of the world accepts as footage of the humbled former dictator — the markings are not apparent as Mr. Hussein strokes his straggly beard.

It's not the only detail that disbelievers have seized on. Others find it strange that Mr. Hussein's hair is black in the footage, but his beard is white.

"Everyone knows that Saddam dyes his hair, but after eight months hiding in a hole, it's still black?" asked Diaa, a 37-year-old taxi driver who gave only his first name. "Tell me how this is possible. When they captured [former information minister Mohammed Saeed al-Sahhaf] after a few weeks, his hair was already white."

[hcap]

Some more
Read the entire article for yourself.

CHERYL SEAL REPORTS: The Capture of Saddam: The Questions the Media Are (as Usual) Failing to Ask

http://baltimore.indymedia.org/newswire/display/5804/index.php

"BBC 2002 Report on DNA testing

"Typically, more than 10 locations need to be tested before a laboratory can be sure that it has positively identified a specific person. The most common test works by taking DNA from biological evidence and making millions of copies of it - enough to allow a laboratory to match it against corresponding samples such as a lock of hair or a relative's DNA. The tests themselves are time-consuming and they are also extremely sensitive to contamination. Any organic contaminants from a crime scene, particularly one which is old or has been exposed to the weather, may also be copied by accident, making the results useless. The combination of these factors, and the need to be absolutely sure of the findings if they are to play a role in a murder enquiry, means that it can take several
weeks to get a clear result."

"Last but not Least, What Happened to All those "hoardes of Saddam loyalists"?

Good liars keep their lies straight. But maybe the Bush administration is just hoping no one notices the little discrepancies in the thrill of the moment as they watch the footage of Saddam and the capture in endless loops on FOX, CNN, NBC, et al.

But up until this week, Bush was claiming that the attacks on American troops were largely orchestrated by rebels who were "fiercely loyal" to Saddam. If they were so fiercely loyal, why was he living in a hole, not even able to cut his hair? And why was he having to (allegedly) threaten people to take him in for food or whatever (the latest claim)?

In their PSYOPS-ish efforts to create a demoralizing scenario (a brokem, disoriented Saddam living in a hole) that would (it was hoped) quash the Iraqi spirit of rebellion, the Bush administration appears to have overlooked the glaring gulf between this scenario and the one it was pushing until Sunday: of a defiant Saddam surrounded by fiercely loyal henchmen, toting an arsenal and billions of dollars, not to mention a "sophisticted communications network."

As Shakespeare said, "Oh what a tangled web we weave, when first we practice to deceive."

Now let's see how long this latest web holds up before it, too, comes unraveled."

[boxcar]

...the rest of us, I'm sure, can enjoy this this little Christmas poem (sent to me by a buddy of mine).

http://www.gagg.org/Two_weeks_before_christmas.htm

Merry Chrsitmas to One and to All!

Boxcar

[hcap]

Boxcar

I agree an outlandish theory, however his BLACK hair is bugging me no end. Why, when the rest of him looked the way he did, did he continue to dye his hair??
On the run eating mars bars, moving from rathole to rathole every 3 hours?
Vanity did not help his disguise. Vanity would also dictate a haircut and shave.

What would Perry Mason say? Maybe

"Only his hairdresser knows for sure"

ps: Also, let's see if all of a sudden grecian formula#21 is found in the hut.
It wasn't there when the first got him
:rolleyes: :rolleyes:

[boxcar]

Hcap, what if this recent "earthquake" wasn't really an earthquake at all but a massive terrorist attack that comprised all the recent "chatter" intelligence agencies have been hearing of late? Heck...this cover-up would make the "Saddam capture" pale by comparison, don't you think?

Boxcar

[Lefty]

This Just In! Kennedy Assination Solved: Lee Harvey Oswald was really an alter ego of JFK. Kennedy actually killed himself!

[hcap]

Boxcar and Lefty

Are there any quote "conspiracy" theories that you do accept? Or do you guys take everything on face value? Things that are first disbelieved and labelled "conspiracy" or "crazy", sometimes later are discovered to have some element of truth. Not every loony theory--- just some.

So far neither of you have given a reasonable explanation for Saddam's black hair. I can think of a few, like his last hideouts were more luxurious allowing him to call in his hairdresser or to do it himself,
Still not kosher tho....

Do you accept the " single bullet theory" of Arlen Spector of the Warren Comm?

[Lefty]

For one thing, when you put a conspiracy theory out "there" it's up to you to prove it, not for others to disprove. Saddam had access to a farmhouse. Is it unreasonable to assume he had access to hair coloring and a mirror?
I do not believe Lee Harvey Oswald acted alone. Yet, it's really never been proven otherwise. It's been forty years. Can conspirators really keep quiet that long?

[boxcar]

Well stated, Lefty.

Also, insofar as another simple explanation for the black hair is Saddam's vanity. This is a guy who had a bad leg and didn't want to walk very far in public for fear that people would see him limp -- which to his warped mind would have been a sign of weakness or old age. Since he's that self-conscious, then he probably wouldn't want people to see him with gray hair. (With his gazillions, he probably had a lifetime supply of Grecian Formula stored in some secret warehouse location.) :D

Boxcar

[lsbets]

I have figured it out! The man captured instead of Saddam was Amazin! He had planted some posts prior to the arranged capture to throw us off, but notice that those have run out and we hear from him no more! The man with the lack of gray hair is really our very own Amazin!

[hcap]

Somehow I am beginning to suspect you guys are not taking this seriously

Anyway, Happy Holidays and Merry Christmas.

hcap

[Tom]

1. Do we know for sure Sodamn did in fact dye his hair? Some people have black hair and white or gray beards. Could just be that's the way his hair comes in?
2. Maybe he had his head up a camel's butt just before we caught him? Didn't have time to put the whole thing in?:rolleyes: ?
3. Single bullet theory. For years, I did not believe it, but after seeing modern day forensics on it, it seems that it probably possible. I don't believe Oswald acted alone, though. Too many people wanted Kennedy dead. Could it be possible that two or more groups, acting alone, just happened to show up in Dallas on the same day and all fired at once, scraed the hell of each other, and all disappeared? Could happen. :D
4. Some conspiracies to exist. I know of one, for a fact, that involves the people at BrisBet, people at NYRA, Several jockies, and the stewards. My bets are being monitored and neutralized.
The establishement is nervous that I might accumulate enough track winnings, being the ace capper I am, that I would be able to finance my politcal ambitions and become a major player in the power game internationally. They will stop me at all costs. In fact, I have traced the interuptions in my streaming video to black helicopters disturbing the atmosphere over my home. And the FBI taps on my internet cable sure isn't helping things.

Heh, heh, heh, Merry Christmas.
:)

[PaceAdvantage]

I don't get it...I've studied the posted pictures, and the "Captured" Saddam looks to me to be a perfect match to the "Real" Saddam posted, accounting for a little age difference and "haggardness" based on him being on the run for the past 9 months or so....

Birthmark matches, lines on face match, nose matches, bottom lip matches...chin REALLY seems to match....everything I checked seems to match....

What am I missing? Hcap, did you accidently mislabel the "Real" and "Double" photos????

Also, did you consider that in those "Real" photos, he might be wearing a little makeup to make himself look better or younger?? Those are probably state-sponsored "official" photos you have there under the "Real" label, so I'm sure he's looking his best.

[Lefty]

PA, what you say is correct and not only that they have matched up bullet holes that Saddam was known to have. Demos, get out the crying towels cause: WE GOT HIM!

[MarylandPaul@HSH]

You think *this* group gambles...what a gamble that would be for the Bush administration. Pass off a body double as the real deal to the rest of the world. If it were proved that we got the wrong guy, the embarrassment would be off the charts; the upcoming election would be handed to the Dems on a silver platter. It'd be right up there with Nixon's shenanigans...

As much as Bush wanted him, I can't believe they'd take that chance.

[Amazin]

Good point ,but did it matter that there were no WMD's? That should've been a greater embarrassment. This *group* gets away with murder...literally.

Merry Xmas.

[JustRalph]

Originally posted by Amazin
Good point ,but did it matter that there were no WMD's? That should've been a greater embarrassment. This *group* gets away with murder...literally. Merry Xmas.

Ok...who did Bush Murder? you really are out on a limb sometimes..........

[Lefty]

J.R, you know what the amazin guy is gonna say... Bush murdered innocent Itaquis, yada, yada yada. He doesn't know the difference between liberation, war and murder. His viewpoint is the prism of a 5 yr old thinking why can't everybody just be good? And gosh, if we're just as a nice to everyone as we can be, then golly jeepers they will be nice right back. This man's mental processes, at least in his view of this country and the world, has not matured beyond a 5 yr old mentality.

[hcap]

PA

Comparing the "captured Saddam"
to the "real Saddam---

1-Birthmark is larger and closer to the brow. I am assuming the lower mark is an injury.

2-The right side of his hairline is higher and the left side is lower.

3-Number of deep brow lines is different. 4 vs 3. Also the second line from the bottom is much deeper. Brow lines change but this much change I think would require many, many years

4-Lower lip is substantially fuller

5- The cleft in his chin is more pronounced in the "real Saddam" than the captured, even though the captured is less jowly. Also the jowls SHOULD be more DROOPY and have more folds in the "captured " due to the loss of weight---unless he did neck excersizes on the run while dying his hair and eating candy bars.

Tom WE did know he died his hair

http://www.cnn.com/2003/WORLD/meast/08/01/sprj.irq.main/

Friday, August 1, 2003 Posted: 10:59 PM EDT (0259 GMT)
(CNN) -- The United States released digitally altered pictures of ousted Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein on Friday that coalition forces are using in their efforts to track him down.

The U.S. military images -- which were posted on the U.S. Central Command Web site Friday -- show five versions of Saddam. One shows him with his dyed black hair and a full beard; another wearing a salt-and-pepper beard and a white headdress with black bands; two poses show him with what would probably be his natural hair color -- gray -- and a mustache; and another shows him with gray hair and no mustache.

Also See:
http://www.heraldonline.com/iraq/ir...p-2197130c.html
http://www.theadvertiser.news.com.a...5E20221,00.html

MarylandPaul

If it were proved that we got the wrong guy, the embarrassment would be off the charts; the upcoming election would be handed to the Dems on a silver platter. It'd be right up there with Nixon's shenanigans...
I tend to agree. Proabably the reason I haven't bought it yet...
However given the crass way this administration has brought PR to almost propaganda heights I am beginning to wonder.

But as I first said the BLACK hair is bugging me no end.

[JustRalph]

Originally posted by hcap
I tend to agree. Proabably the reason I haven't bought it yet...However given the crass way this administration has brought PR to almost propaganda heights I am beginning to wonder. But as I first said the BLACK hair is bugging me no end.

you are starting to give yourself away here. The statement above is making me wonder if you are receiving those Democratic Committee faxes.....

you can also explain all of your problems with the pictures of the captured Saddam with one explanation. Weight Loss..........I could show you a few pictures of me from ten years back and a few things have moved north and south too........even East and West...Ha......!

[Tom]

Be nice to the DNC.....they have enough trouble as it is. All of thier condidates are a joke, not one on them can be taken seriously on anyything. The only one wiht a second career to fall back on is Al Sharpton - the SNL boogie-boy! He could either be a hip hop artist or go back to his true calling...representing lying whores!
Kerry? Just took out a $6.4 million mortagage....on a $100K salary a year? Hey, can you spell "bought and paid for" ?
Howard Dean, the hokey-pokey candidate? You take stand on this, you take it back the next day, you take a stand again, and you shake it all about, do the hokey pokey yadaa, yadda, yadda....
And Hillary, the non-candidate, flying around like the vulture she is, waiting for carion. She is setting the demos for a loss this year so she can run in 08 and not against an incumbant. Can you spell "whore?"

Meanwhile, all the repubs have to show for the last four years is three dictatorships neutralized, freedom from murder and torute and slavery for two nations, an economy left wrecked by Clinton on the mend and coming back, many old world nations knowing now where their place is. A homeland securitty system that is poicking up the slack from the slackerd French....is anyone surprised that the latest terror threat involved the land of the roll-overs? And we got double on this opne. not only did we keep terroists out, we kept a bunch of French out as well!

Yep. The DNC has its work cut out for it. :rolleyes:

[boxcar]

"Everyone knows that Saddam dyes his hair, but after eight months hiding in a hole, it's still black?" asked Diaa, a 37-year-old taxi driver who gave only his first name. "Tell me how this is possible. When they captured [former information minister Mohammed Saeed al-Sahhaf] after a few weeks, his hair was already white."

[Lefty]

Poor John Kerry cannot even sell his candicacy to his wife. She is loaded with millions and millions, yet he has to mortgage his house to continue.

[hcap]

Tom
This idea reminds me that nowadays, when everyone has camcorders at the ready, we never hear about UFOs anymore.
A good conspiracy needs a fertile mind to grow in.
JustRalph you are starting to give yourself away here. The statement above is making me wonder if you are receiving those Democratic Committee faxes.....
Actually I receive faxes from UFOs who are secretly working for the Democratic party, and yes you can record them on camcoders, but it must be in Betamax format.