DTB?

[Eddie Haskell]

Matt:

Don't throw facts Wayne's way it'll only confuse him.

As I stated before and I'll state it again, the happiest man alive when Bush was re-elected was Osama Bin Laden.

Don't let the destroyers of democracy currently in power in DC fool any of you. They, like most Americans, believe that Iraq and 9-11 are one in the same. You see, my fellow posters, this country really hasn't progressed very far from the southern mentality of the 60's. Probably not too far from your house Wayneo.

The only difference is that the majority of Americans have replaced their bigotry and prejudices towards blacks with bigotry and prejudice towards browns. Most Americans equate Iraq with 9-11 cause it was all brown people who did it.

That is the baseline truth. There ain't been a whole lotta tears shed for the 12,000 + Iraqi civilians murdered in this republican war. Why?? Cause their brown. No difference between sand niggers.

The wonderful thing about prejudice and bigotry is that most racists and bigots don't even know they are racists and bigots.

Then again the "liberal" media (owned by Disney and General Electric) are broadcasting pictures of those maimed, dead and otherwise brutalized Iraqi's on a daily basis. Yep, those raging, hippie, liberal, commie, democrats over there at GE are really trying to bring this administration down.

I always knew Nixon would be back. The biggest falacy, joke and lie continually repeated by Wayne is his characterization of the media as "liberal". Everytime I read one of his posts refering to the liberal media I have to laugh.

Wayne, it continues to amaze me how you believe you have any credibility whatsoever. I guess you are a member of the George Costanza School of Advocacy: "It's not a lie, if you believe it". I swear if you weren't an insurance agent you should be a lobbyist.

Let's be more accurate shall we. Is it your position that the corporate media didn't carry the big criminal's speech last night because of there liberal bias. You're right, they carried all of Clintons speechs. Yeah, right. You are such a con.

If the media was liberal why don't we see pictures like we did back in the 60's and 70's oh great conman. I seem to be missing the body bags and burnt corpses of dead Iraqi elementary school kids. Maybe I'm just watching the wrong channel.

Now you and others like you who have taken over this country are trying to silence PBS. Utterly amazing.

Impeach Bush then indict him.

Eddie

 

[DOGS THAT BARK]

"And what about the denial of responsibility to wounded vets? Do you REALLY think that the troops at Ft Bragg support this bunch of hypocrites who give themselves tax cuts while getting them slaughtered and maimed?"

Ocelot It would make no diff who was president or what war we were in--especially the troops at Fort Bragg would follow orders without question--and take pride in their responsiblity I can assure you.

Edward Good to see you recovered and our back--probably have some time on your hands with the Viagra class action be exposed so quickly.

Take a sip of that cool aid--and see if you can bring in some facts this time around.

PS I AM STILl WAITING for anyone to produce any part of Bushes speech per above from Liberal media?
Would be good job for you Edward since you have lots of time on your hands.

 

[dr. freeze]

why shoudl the government be paying for liberals like Bill Moyers to spread their agenda?

 

[kosar]

Good to see ya around, Haskell. We need a little balance around here..

 

[ferdville]

Ocelot - so this lack of support for Vets only became a reality with the Bush presidency? Are you saying that Clinton and Congress were highly supportive of the VA and causes of veterans? You can't blame the lack of support on Bush without looking at what happened before he took office.

 

[Master Capper]

Why can's you all just admit that Iraq had NOTHING to do with 9-11? NONE of the terrorist were from Iraq or had ties to Iraq, I believe at least 85% were from Saudi Arabia. Tell me how did attacking Iraq throttle terrorism? I am not aware of any terrorist attacks towards the USA that involved anyone from Iraq, but the way Bush is talking Iraq was the main player in terror which is just not true. It was bad enough using the fabricated story on the Weapons of Mass Destruction, but to try and now shift gears from WMD's to Iraq being the epicenter of terror is just insane and untrue. Yes Saddam was a terrible human being and a butcher, but the guy had been in a box for over a decade and had limited ability to even have contact with the outside world and I thought we got out of the regime change and nation building years ago when it become obvious that it did not work. The epicenter of terror has been and is still Saudi Arabia and to not make that case is completely wrong and to put our troops lives at risk for bullshit lies is very unpatriotic and criminal.

 

[DOGS THAT BARK]

"Why can's you all just admit that Iraq had NOTHING to do with 9-11? NONE of the terrorist were from Iraq or had ties to Iraq, I believe at least 85% were from Saudi Arabia. Tell me how did attacking Iraq throttle terrorism?"

ONCE AGAIN who said Iraq was responsible for 911??? Still waiting for the quotes on anyone that said such I ask forlast week--still none but same ole contentions??

--and how has it throttled terrorism--it has brought them to one area (and not the U.S.) where there is daily onslaught on them--do I need to put up the list of upper echlon terrorist captuired or killed since GW reign AGAIN.

Do liberals prefer these people all running around at large--you prefer Lybia with WMD's and selling them on market or don't you think Iraq had anything to do with them giving em up--

You prefer the Clinton close your eyes approach and hope for the best??

You don't like us setting up shop in the midst of terrorist region--you don't like idea of Iraq now being a democracy and aiding in fighting the terrorist--you evidently must think Suddam in power would be better alternative--right?

You don't like pakistan now aiding in fight also-and Saudi-Yemin ect--I know you felt MUCH SAFER when terrorist were training openly in most these countries now fighting them with no funds frozen.

 

[ocelot]

Ferdville:

Here is a link to an article from the Cleveland Plain Dealer backing up what I posted earlier. Yes, the Dems tried to get more funding for Vets and it was shot down by your boys. Now under political pressure they are trying damage control.

http://www.cleveland.com/news/plaindealer/index.ssf?/base/news/1120131100180460.xml&coll=2#continue

 

[ocelot]

DTB: There is no doubt in my mind that troops will always follow orders. That does not mean they have confidence in their political leaders. I suspect many of them know they are being led by asses. This is what makes it all the more tragic - such a sorry waste.

Meanwhile, where is Osama?

And Clinton is not relevant in this discussion. I know he got a blowjob. I know lots of the troops didn't like him. But he never lied to them and then sent them to die for his own personal grudge either.

 

[Master Capper]

You must utilize selective hearing if you cannot grasp that Bush is trying to link 9/11 with the invasion of Iraq, if you need quotes on when this link has been used before then do a search for Dickless Cheney and he made this comment about Iraq when he was on I beleive the Russert show. Bush is again grasping for straws trying to link the misled invasion of Iraq to somehow justify that the invasion was well thought out and the public is just not going to buy this crap anymore as more Republicans are now seeing through the haze and has has a serious credibility problem.

Do you actually believe what you typed that all of the terrorist have been summoned to Iraq as if this was some great plan devised by Bush? First of all, I would estimate that only 5% of the terrorist in the world are in Iraq and that may even be pushing it, secondly, the upper echelon of terrorist that were captured in Iraq comes from a goofy deck of playing cards that utilized Saddam's top people whom outside of Iraq were not known terrorist.

Libya has not been a major player in anything since Reagan bombed them, so to say that I am impressed would be a stretch. This guy gave up his limited arms in order to secure a legacy for his children so that they could continue to rule Libya and gain some financial assistance to think that they came clean due to being scared is not true.

What the hell does Clinton have to do with this quagmire in Iraq? Remeber, it wasn't under Clinton's watch that 9/11 happened but rather it was under Bush's watch that warnings were ignored.

Yes it would be great if Iraq became a Democracy but it just is not going to happen with the warring sects as the history of the country will show. Then again we are back to nation building which I was under the impression was hated by Republicans and were we not told that the oil in Iraq would pay to rebuild the country? Or is this just another long line of lies brought to us by G.W?

So now Pakistan and Saudi Arabia are taking on the terrorists, do you actually believe this to be true? I would lay 50-1 odds that both of these countries are doing more to back the terrorists than they are eliminating them. Both of these countries will do a little to save face and give the appearance that they are with us, but in reality they will not take the necessary actions against their own people.

If we should of invaded any country for regime change and to attack the terrorists then we should be in Saudi Arabia right now instead of Iraq where there is no documented eveidence of WMD's nor terror attacks against the US. On the other hand, Saudi Arabia refuses to sign a disclosure to allow the U.N. into their country to investigate reports of Nukes.


Now tell me what was the rationale for going into Iraq, don't tell me WMD"s as this is a lie, don't tell me regime change then we better get busy as there are at least a dozen other regimes just as violent. Please don't tell me to battle terrorist since there were no terrorists that attacked Americans from Iraq, so what is the rationale? It's starting to look more and more like the rationale is boiling down to the greed of oil, which is really sick.

 

[ferdville]

America's veterans have seldom ever received the support they should have. Blaming Bush makes no sense. The lack of support for the VA began long before W came to town. Presidents prior to Bush did nothing to cure the problem of helping our veterans. You can blame Bush for a lot of things, and if you want to blame him for this I don'thave a problem with it. However, there is a long line of presidents that are just as guilty.

 

[StevieD]

Ferd, the point is not what other Presidents did. The point is what did Bush do. Bush cut benefits.

 

[CHARLESMANSON]

You liberals are fawking PRICELESS!!!!

:mj07: :mj07: :mj07:

This is why I don't post here anymore. It's 90% liberal propoganda. Bunch of crybaby pussies regurgitating the same shit over and over preaching to eachothers choir.

I'm just sitting here crying my eyes out in laughter over all the desperately distorted and anti-American posts that you liberals feverishly fire off. It's the same thing month in and month out from the SAME people!!

Don't you liberals ever get tired of whining and complaining every day?? Don't you get tired of crying, bitching, blaming, pointing fingers, and losing elections?

Why didnt the Ft Bragg tropps applaud?? LMAO...you guys truly have no clue do you? I guess like Ocelot speculated, it was due to VA cuts. :mj07: What a moron.


LOL Ocelot, I gotta hand it to you man. You're like Michael Moore on steroids. lol. Where's Osama???? LMAO!! Maybe we should ask Bill Clinton since Clinton failed 3 separate times to capture Osama while we had him in our crosshairs. (Yes it's true, spin it all you want then blame Bush)

The president mentioned 9-11 because if we fail to stay on the offensive and fight terror abroad, we will see another 9-11 type attack here at home. HOW HARD IS THAT TO UNDERSTAND??

:chairshot (hello??...earth to liberals??....if you'd stop hating and for once listen to what he had to say, he couldn't have made it any more clear about 9-11 and Iraq)

My god this isn't rocket science. Terrorism is a global issue. Wake up. It is not confined to Afghanistan. Hell, who do you think we are fighting in Iraq anyways? AL QUEDA!!!! You want to fight them overseas like men or sit at home like liberal pussies and wait for another 9-11 to hit our families again?? That's chickenshit.

Blame Bush all you want. You guys are just a bunch of fingerpointing crybabies and your entire political party has no agenda or ideas whatsoever. No plan on fighting terror. No plan on Soc Sec...nothing!! No wonder John Kerry lost the election. Americans dont like crybabies and fingerpointers. You guys are weak and you want to retreat from the battle. What a bunch of pussies. Thank god I'm not a democrat.

 

[ocelot]

Marilyn Manson: Go suck your own eggs, slimewipe.

 

[ferdville]

Ocelot - Let us just boil it down to one issue. Don't rant and rave about Bush, Iraq, Saudi Arabia,Dick Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld, et al. Just answer ONE point that you yourself have posed:

"It's starting to look more and more like the rationale is boiling down to the greed of oil, which is really sick."
Ocelot

What EVIDENCE to you have that the US has appropriated any oil in Iraq? And if not, how and when is this going to happen?

 

[ocelot]

I'm talking about the greed of those associated with the oil business to funnel contracts to themselves and associates, paid for by US taxpayers.

 

[ferdville]

So, in other words, as usual, you have no facts to back up your rants? You just attack all who disagree with you with name-calling, the sky is falling, rhetoric that you make up yourself.

"It's starting to look more and more like the rationale is boiling down to the greed of oil, which is really sick." Ocelot

You said it, not me. So tell me about the greed of the oil business. Who actually is "associated with the oil business" that "funnel(s) contracts to themselves and associates."

Who? When? Give me one example of the U.S. government, which of course is the taxpayers, appropriating Iraqui oil for themselves and/or associates?

 

[ocelot]

Why doesn't Dick Less Cheney show his cards on his secret meetings with his oil cronies? What is he hiding? The LIE about invading Iraq for WMD has been exposed - try reading a F*CKING newspaper peckerwood. So what motivation is left? OBL suer hasn't been found there.

(Though a lot of lucrative contracts to certain US companies have been let, after avoiding competitive bidding of course)

 

[djv]

Iraq will owe us alot after this war. But for some reason I feel we will forgive there dept. in a way that would be fair since we helped blow up half the place. There oil right now is not worth much since there importing it each month instead of exporting. Of course this war cause that. That and out date equipment. And of course the bombers that blow holes in it every other week.
As for Bush's lead men telling the troops at his last speech not to interrupt to much. There not dump. That way in case they don't applaud you can always say that.

 

[ferdville]

Ocelot - Your true stripes are showing again. As all people incapable of logical thinking do, , when you have no response you just call someone names. Wow, I am impressed with your vocabulary,too. Peckerwood. That is a great word and so appropriate for your vocabulary. Your response is normal - no facts to support your diatribe.

Obviously Chaney is hiding something because he won't reveal the contents. Lots of proof there. And by the way, didn't you support John Kerry's decision to not reveal his military records? Of course you did -but this is something different,right?

And then, as if to admit you have no ammunition, you bring up Bin Laden. Another brilliant bit of strategy by the forum's sharpest tack. Please explain how Bin Laden has anything to do with the question I posed? Once again, you can't. Another example of inferior intellect is changing the subject when you have nothing of merit to say on topic. So let us analyze your woefully inept reply to my question....

"It's starting to look more and more like the rationale is boiling down to the greed of oil, which is really sick."
Ocelot

What EVIDENCE do you have that the US has appropriated any oil in Iraq? And if not, how and when is this going to happen?

Uh, well you are a peckerwood! Take that.

Umm, let's see. Chaney won't tell us what happened in those energy meetings.

And yeah, they haven't caught Bin Laden yet.

Boy, I am humbled by the bulletproof logic you have presented in your answer to my question. Now it is starting to make sense. Your communication skills are so much stronger than mine or anyone else here, we just can't follow your superior thinking. Once more you have truly stumped me.

Oh, by the way, back on point, here is your comment and following is my question to you:

"It's starting to look more and more like the rationale is boiling down to the greed of oil, which is really sick."
Ocelot

What EVIDENCE do you have that the US has appropriated any oil in Iraq? And if not, how and when is this going to happen?

Because I am so stupid, instead of calling me sophisticated names that only a genius such as yourself can understand and instead of changing the subject - just answer the question dickhead!!!
Problem is you cannot answer it, isn't it? But go ahead and try - you will think of something even if it has nothing to do with the question I asked. What else is new?

Please reread your assinine response to my first post. Then I will offer you some advice once dispatched by Samuel Clemens:
"Better to be silent and thought a fool than to speak and remove all doubt."

I can't think of better advice to you. Twain must have had some distant relative of yours in mind when he said that.