Home | Community | Message Board
You are not signed in.
Sign In New Account
Forum Index Search Posts Trusted Vendors Highlights Galleries FAQ User List Chat Store Random Growery


This site includes paid links. Please support our sponsors.

General Interest > Political Discussion
Threaded Mode Threaded  Previous topic Previous  View all topics Index  Next topic Next 

Welcome to the Shroomery Message Board! You are experiencing a small sample of what the site has to offer. Please login or register to post messages and view our exclusive members-only content. You'll gain access to additional forums, file attachments, board customizations, encrypted private messages, and much more!

Shop: Sporeworks.EU Spores for European Microscopy   North Spore North Spore Mushroom Grow Kits & Cultivation Supplies

Jump to first unread post Pages: | 1 | 2 | 3 |  [ show all ]
Re: An English article on America [Re: GazzBut]
    #1238719 -

Amen Gazz. Tony Parsons makes the fundamental error of identifying America with the policies of Dubya and his cronies.

The America I know deserves so much better.


--------------------
Don't worry, B. Caapi

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: An English article on America [Re: TheCaptain]
    #1238828 -

This is going to take a while :wink:

Quote:
I understand that the laws in place allow the individual to cast a vote, that is simple enough, but look at the limited candidates you have a choice of voting for.


We have countless political parties, as well as individuals running for office.  In 1999, we had 11 presidential candidates.  Granted, in national elections, Democrats and Republicans hold a HUGE majority of offices, large numbers of votes for independant parties (public opinion) can sway the stances of elected officials.

Quote:
It doesnt offer up much fact (referances to quotes, history, events from more than one limited persective) to base its argument upon, uses a lot of exagerating and subjective language which keys emotion.



It doesn't make any claims that need to be backed up by historical evidence.

Quote:
The Taliban, who were a war lordish power were rivals of the Northern Alliance, the resulting power imbalance within this country led to instability- and not a safe ground for this grand pipeline, which to my knowledge had been proposed years and years ago, but the conditions were not right.


We gained more allies who are now willing to sell us oil.  Oil was not our primary motive for attacking Afghanistan, the fact that the Taliban claimed to have bin Laden in custody and refused to turn him over to us was the reason.  If oil were the only reason for attacking this country, we would have done so long ago, when we were supporting the Taliban against the USSR.

Quote:
They are no saints- it is not a democracy, and were only fortunate because they were the enemy of the Taliban.



No, it's not a democracy.  It's a republic now, and the Northern Alliance shares power with many other opposition groups.

Quote:
And what of the supposed "War on Terrorism" ? Its interesting to note,to re- consider motives in Afghan, that while there were training camps in that country, the vast majority of these camps are in Kashmir, and in Pakistan.



You have seen the cries of outrage brought on by the war with the Taliban, whom we had good reason to attack (bin Laden).  Image the outrage that would ensue an attack on Pakistan, a country which (as far as the world is concerned) has nothing to hide.  That said, we should wipe out the many camps in Pakistan... maybe we're afraid they'll nuke India?

Quote:
Why is it such an imperative thing now, when the infrastructure of Iraq is at its weakest and least threatening that WMD are a danger to everyone?

Also note, WMD were never used during the Gulf War, which only serves to indicate the level of threat Iraq poses. What other opportune time to use chemical and biological agents would there be than when the troops of your "mortal enemy" are running through your attack range??? 



If we invade Iraq when it is weak, we will rid the world of Saddam with the lowest amount of casualities.  Also, there were thousands upon thousands of cases of Gulf War Syndrome.  The cause of this disease has yet to be discovered, but the symptoms (memory lapses, fatigue, joint pains, rashes, headaches, dizzy spells, cancer, etc.) are consistant with chemical exposure.  Plus, there was around 320 tons of uranium dust dumped on the desert where we fought.  Sounds like chemical warfare to me.

Quote:
It has been proven historically that US involvement is by and large opportunistic based on a business premise, I encourage someone to try and disprove this. Examine other atrocities and instances of genocide within strategically and economically insignificant territories in the past 20 years and you will see that bombing campaigns and US intervention is nowhere in sight.



WWI and WWII were both fought by us for our protection.  Rather than cause the wars, business acted as an invaluable aid to help us win.  The war in Korea was fought to contain communism.  The war in Vietnam was supposed to be fought for the same reason, though I believe it was fought because LBJ wanted to go down in history as one fo the great presidents.  The Gulf War was fought by the UN because of Saddam's refusal to leave Kuwait.

We also sent troops to Kosovo and Somalia to fight madmen participating in genocide, in the 1990s.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: An English article on America [Re: Anonymous]
    #1238860 -

Oil was not our primary motive for attacking Afghanistan

Of course it was. Or do you think a Unocal man being installed as the puppet leader and the oil pipeline already being built is just coincidence?

bin Laden in custody and refused to turn him over to us was the reason

So why have you abandoned the search for Bin Laden now the oil pipeline can be built? If he was the reason you went to war why arn't you still at war trying to find him instead of moving onto another oil-rich country? Use your head.

and the Northern Alliance shares power with many other opposition groups

Don't be silly. The Northern Alliance shares power with no-one. These guys are vicious warlords, they do not believe in sharing power. They rule their provinces.

whom we had good reason to attack (bin Laden).

Whom you never found?

WWI and WWII were both fought by us for our protection

Pardon? Was Hitler intending to ship across that 3000 mile ocean and invade america any time soon?

The Gulf War was fought by the UN because of Saddam's refusal to leave Kuwait.

Israel has refused to leave the west bank and flouted UN resolutions for 30 years. Why havn't we invaded them?


--------------------
Don't worry, B. Caapi

Edited by Alex123 (01/22/03 08:16 AM)

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: An English article on America [Re: Xlea321]
    #1239011 -

Quote:
Was Hitler intending to ship across that 3000 mile ocean and invade america any time soon?

He had German U boats off of our shore, sinking our ships, so given the opportunity, I wouldn't put it past him to try to invade the US. If he could have conquered Europe, why wouldn't he have just moved on to North America.


--------------------
Re-Defeat Bush in '04

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: An English article on America [Re: ]
    #1239030 -

Auto-Summary
The article criticizes the over-the-top rhetoric surrounding the 9/11 attacks, arguing that America's restraint in retaliation was a sign of strength. It highlights the emotional responses of various groups but lacks evidence and factual references. The author contends that America's power and influence should not be blamed for the lack of democracy in the Middle East or Muslim world, and that America is often unfairly blamed for issues beyond its control. The piece concludes by urging readers to remember and not forget the atrocities committed against America on 9/11, while criticizing the media for focusing on President George Bush rather than the real perpetrators.

Rhetoric- Artificial eloquence; language that is showy and elaborate but largely empty of clear ideas.
-from Websters.


"
These days you don't have to be some dust-encrusted nut job in Kabul or
Karachi or Finsbury Park to see America as the Great Satan.
The truth is that America has behaved with enormous restraint since
September 11. The anti-American alliance is made up of self-loathing liberals who blame the Americans for every ill in the Third World, and conservatives suffering

Evidence? Fact? Published referance to this alliance?

Remember, remember - Remember the gut-wrenching tapes of weeping men
phoning their wives to say, "I love you," before they were burned alive.
Remember those people leaping to their deaths from the top of burning
skyscrapers.
Remember the hundreds of firemen buried alive.
Remember the smiling face of that beautiful little girl who was on one of
the planes with her mum.
Remember, remember - And realize that America has never retaliated for 9/11
in anything like the way it could have.

Theres nothing being discussed here. Intensive reliance on emotional response to evoke thought

So a few al-Qaeda tourists got locked up without a trial in Camp X-ray? .
So some Afghan wedding receptions were shot up after they merrily fired their semi-automatics in a sky full of American planes? A shame, but maybe next time they should stick to confetti.

Contorts these events, uses emotional response in light of factual, analytical language

AMERICA could have turned a large chunk of the world into a parking lot.
That it didn't is a sign of strength . American voices are already being
raised against attacking Iraq - that's what a democracy is for. How many in
the Islamic world will have a minute's silence for the slaughtered
innocents of 9/11? How many Islamic leaders will have the guts to say that the mass murder of 9/11 was an abomination ?

Fact to base this on? And yes, many Islamic leaders have spoken out against this. This last line directs hatred for Islam as a whole, in the absence of any reason or evidence

When the news of 9/11 broke on the West Bank, those freedom-loving
Palestinians were dancing in the street. America watched all of that - and
didn't push the button. We should thank the stars that America is the most
powerful nation in the world. I still find it incredible that 9/11 did not
provoke all-out war. Not a "war on terrorism." A real war.

The fundamentalist dudes are talking about "opening the gates of hell," if
America attacks Iraq. Well, America could have opened the gates of hell
like you wouldn't believe.

The last two paragraphs arent really based on anything more than speculation as to our reactions. Could have, should, didnt, has no place in any argument based on actual events.

The US is the most militarily powerful nation that ever strode the face of
the earth. The campaign in Afghanistan may have been less than perfect and
the planned war on Iraq may be misconceived.

But don't blame America for not bringing peace and light to these wretched . How many democracies are there in the Middle East, or in the Muslim world ? You can count them on the fingers of one hand - assuming you
haven't had any chopped off for minor shoplifting.

This just gets more rediculous, now the article is attacking Muslims as a whole? The writers slant seems to be very racist. Furthermore no evidence is given why we shouldnt blame America for the lack of democracy.



I love America, yet America is hated. I guess that makes me Bush's poodle.
But I would rather be a dog in New York City than a Prince in Riyadh. Above
all, America is hated because it is what every country wants to be - rich, free, strong, open, optimistic. Not ground down by the past, or religion,
or some caste system. America is the best friend this country ever had and
we should start remembering that.

Where does the author get this idea? Totally an assumption

Or do you really think the USA is the root of all evil? Tell it to the loved ones of the men and women who leaped to their death from the burning towers. Tell it to the nursing mothers whose husbands died on one of the hijacked planes, or were ripped apart in a collapsing skyscraper. And tell it to the hundreds of young widows whose husbands worked for the New York Fire Department.

How exactly can the fate of individuals determine the record of foreign relations???


To our shame, George Bush gets a worse press than Saddam Hussein. Once we were told that Saddam gassed the Kurds, tortured his own people and set up rape-camps in Kuwait. Now we are told he likes Quality Street. Save me the
range center, Oh Mighty One!

...Were told by the same people wanting to gather public support for a war. How come no one said anything about these atrocities when he was a great ally, and getting chemical and bio weapons from us?

Remember, remember, September 11 -

One of the greatest atrocities in human history was committed against America.

Im not too sure about that...
No, do more than remember. Never forget."



Dont look to this sort of article to base your opinions upon, it is entirely empty of argument, fact, and any sort of political analysis



--------------------
"I mean, it's real hard to be free when you are bought and sold in the marketplace. 'Course, don't ever tell anybody that they're not free 'cause then they're gonna get real busy killin' and maimin' to prove to you that they are."

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: An English article on America [Re: Xlea321]
    #1239053 -

Quote:
Of course it was. Or do you think a Unocal man being installed as the puppet leader and the oil pipeline already being built is just coincidence?



I never said oil wasn't a motive at all, I said it wasn't our primary motive. Seeing as how neither side can be proven, however, I'll leave it at that.

Quote:
So why have you abandoned the search for Bin Laden now the oil pipeline can be built? If he was the reason you went to war why arn't you still at war trying to find him instead of moving onto another oil-rich country?



We're still after him, it just isn't front page news every time an al-Quada (sic?) conspiritor is caught, now that the world has moved on to bashing us for Iraq.

Quote:
Don't be silly. The Northern Alliance shares power with no-one.



Yes they do.

Quote:
Pardon? Was Hitler intending to ship across that 3000 mile ocean and invade america any time soon?



Japan bombed Pearl Harbor, we declared war on them, Germany declared war on us. I'm guessing most of the world would agree that we acted in self defence.

Quote:
Israel has refused to leave the west bank and flouted UN resolutions for 30 years. Why havn't we invaded them?



Iraq invaded Kuwait for oil. Israel holds the West Bank because they were attacked by Egypt and Jordon, among other Arab nations. The situations are nothing alike.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: An English article on America [Re: TheCaptain]
    #1239109 -

I wasn't going to reply to this thread again but since this a side note I'll make an exception.

With all due respect:

Rhetoric:

"1a. The art or study of using language effectively and persuasively. b. A treatise or book discussing this art. "

Taken from The American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language

"noun [U]
speech or writing which is intended to be effective and persuasive, or specialized the study of the ways of using language effectively"

Taken from Cambridge Dictionaries Online

"1.
(a) The art or study of using language effectively and persuasively.
(b)A treatise or book discussing this art. "

Taken from yourDictionary.com

"1 : the art of speaking or writing effectively: as a : the study of principles and rules of composition formulated by critics of ancient times b : the study of writing or speaking as a means of communication or persuasion"

Taken from Merriam-Webster Online

I suggest you get a better dictionary. The primary meaning of this word is clear and often a confusion for those unacquainted with precise language. You meant mere rhetoric but that is not the primary meaning of the word. In some circles your using it could be construed as equivocating.

Carry on

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: An English article on America [Re: Anonymous]
    #1239115 -

These are going to get LONG...

Granted, in national elections, Democrats and Republicans hold a HUGE majority of offices

That was what I was referring to. Other parties not corporately funded dont have the finincial means to grant them the same exposure as these two, hence their low runnings.

It doesn't make any claims that need to be backed up by historical evidence.

??!?!?! It sure does. Like I said before, read some history, articles form another perspective, and you'll see how the opinions of that article are based on fallacy.

We gained more allies who are now willing to sell us oil.

as Saddam was an ally and we supported years ago, when he was still ruthless. There is a viscious cycle that is perpetuated by Foreign policy.

No, it's not a democracy. It's a republic now, and the Northern Alliance shares power with many other opposition groups.

What are your sources on this one??

ou have seen the cries of outrage brought on by the war with the Taliban, whom we had good reason to attack (bin Laden).

I have also seen those cries of outrage go unconsidered. Millions (?) of people organized during the vietnam war couldnt stop that conflict, you assume a couple thousand here and there will stop this one?

If this were only a "War on Terrorism" I would support it fuly, but where is the concern where bin Laden is now? Oh yah, everyone forgot about that. Anthrax comming from within the country? Who go caught on that one? This conflict does not take logical steps to stopping the terrorist threats, its plain as day.

If we invade Iraq when it is weak, we will rid the world of Saddam with the lowest amount of casualities

Sure, but the fact that it IS weak should indicate that it doesnt pose a threat to the US, or the surronding countries for that matter.

Plus, there was around 320 tons of uranium dust dumped on the desert where we fought. Sounds like chemical warfare to me.

DPU rounds (uranium), used by coalition forces are the closest possibility to this phenomena. NO chemical agents were detected or deployed during the conflict. Evidence supports this.

WWI and WWII were both fought by us for our protection. Rather than cause the wars, business acted as an invaluable aid to help us win.

WWII? Yes, i agree with that. WWI? No. There was absolutely no danger to American territory or American lives at this point. Shipping could expect losses, and in of itself is NOT an excuse to go to war.

The Gulf War was fought by the UN because of Saddam's refusal to leave Kuwait.

"US Ambassador April Glaspie told Saddam in 1990 that "We have no opinion on the Arab-Arab conflicts, like your border disagreement with Kuwait."
This area of the world has seen NUMEROUS cross border conflicts, but there has been no intervention.

We also sent troops to Kosovo and Somalia to fight madmen participating in genocide, in the 1990s.

That conflict, by and large was over by the time the US entered into the fray. The genocide conducted by Serbian forces was done years prior to the start of the US campaign, and the rest of the world knew about it. UN forces were serving there three years before US intervention.


Like I said before, I can agree with your argument based upon the things youve said to me, but I know of much more additional information that changes the way I think about the situation.




--------------------
"I mean, it's real hard to be free when you are bought and sold in the marketplace. 'Course, don't ever tell anybody that they're not free 'cause then they're gonna get real busy killin' and maimin' to prove to you that they are."

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: An English article on America [Re: Anonymous]
    #1239134 -

Quote:
Well, despite what the rest of the world wants to believe, or what they're are told to believe, we helped overthrow a tyrannical government and replace it with a democracy in Afgahnistan.



A few facts for you. I know you detest the oil word and dont believe it is the motive for any of the actions your govt. takes but....

1) Unocal had been wanting to put a pipe through Afghanistan since the early 90's
2) Pakistan Ambassador was advised that U.S were intending to overthrow the Taleban. He was told this in JULY. 2 months prior to Sep 11. (This was reported on the BBC, I will try and find the link if you disbelieve me.)
3)The new leader of Afghanistan was an employee of Exxon (One of the companies who stand to benefit most for the pipeline) up unitl 2001.
4)Remind me, what bu$$iness are George W and most of his buddies in the govt involved in?

Now this isnt my opinion. This is the information which I base my opinion on. How do you read it?
By the way, when were the elections in the Great democracy of Afghanistan held? Who actually voted?

Quote:
Nevermind that Saddam invaded Kuwait because of oil.



Yes because the Kuwaiti's were slant drilling into the Iraqi owned section of the oil field which they shared. Kuwait were also artificially effecting the price of oil to the detriment of Iraq. Kuwait was basically created by the UK and we still hold massive influence there. The UK is equally to blame in this whole affair. The rest of Europe are just gutted they didnt get their hands on it first, which is probabaly part of the reason the French and Germans dont share our zeal to get our hands on even more power in the area, ooops sorry I mean liberate the Iraqi people and save the world from imaginary weapons!!
Now we could have dimplomatically intervened to stop Iraq invading - remember back then we were all good buddies,Sadaam would have listened to his old mates, we could have cut a deal but we didnt. In fact April Gillespie Ambassador to Iraq is reported as telling the Iraqis that the US had no interest in Arab against Arab conflicts.

Quote:
Maybe Saddam is just scared shitless because he knows his time, as a genocidal maniac and leader of Iraq, on this planet is limited. Do you really think someone so openly against western thought would simply destroy all his chemical weapons and stop production of them altogether?




Sadaam wasnt against Western thought - we were buddies remember. His opinions may have changed though once he had been double crossed and his country bombed to fuck by his so called mates.

Quote:
The world has always hated this country, even before it was the United States - this is nothing new. We didn't let this prevent us from helping you in both the world wars, and we're not going to let it prevent us from saving you now.



I hate western imperialism as a whole. It just so happens your the biggest fish so you take most of the flak. But because your the biggest fish you also make the biggest splash in the pond too.




--------------------
Always Smi2le

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: An English article on America [Re: Anonymous]
    #1239157 -

Quote:
Plus, there was around 320 tons of uranium dust dumped on the desert where we fought. Sounds like chemical warfare to me.



You do know who dumped the Uranium dont you? let me give you a clue - It certainly wasnt Sadaam.


--------------------
Always Smi2le

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: An English article on America [Re: ]
    #1239197 -

You should post the enrtire definition....

The American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language
1a. The art or study of using language effectively and persuasively. b. A treatise or book discussing this art. 2. Skill in using language effectively and persuasively. 3a. A style of speaking or writing, especially the language of a particular subject: fiery political rhetoric. b. Language that is elaborate, pretentious, insincere, or intellectually vacuous: His offers of compromise were mere rhetoric . 4. Verbal communication; discourse

Cambridge Dictionaries Online
rhetoric
noun [U]
speech or writing which is intended to be effective and persuasive, or specialized the study of the ways of using language effectively
I was swayed by her rhetoric into donating all my savings to the charity.
How far the president will be able to translate his campaign rhetoric into action remains to be seen.
SPECIALIZED He is a professor of rhetoric at the University of Naples.

(disapproving) Rhetoric is also clever and persuasive language which is not sincere or has no real meaning.
The politician's speech was full of empty (=meaningless) rhetoric.

yourDictionary.com
rhet?o?ric
n.
The art or study of using language effectively and persuasively.
A treatise or book discussing this art.
Skill in using language effectively and persuasively.
A style of speaking or writing, especially the language of a particular subject: fiery political rhetoric.
Language that is elaborate, pretentious, insincere, or intellectually vacuous: His offers of compromise were mere rhetoric.

There are also several definitions of mere. Should I use a prefix to define those?

The American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language
mere1
Inflected forms: Superlative mer?est
1. Being nothing more than what is specified: a mere child; a mere 50 cents an hour. 2. Considered apart from anything else: shocked by the mere idea. 3. Small; slight: could detect only the merest whisper. 4. Obsolete Pure; unadulterated.

Placing Mere in front of the word could also create confusion, and let alone, its not entirely necessary- you understood what I meant




--------------------
"I mean, it's real hard to be free when you are bought and sold in the marketplace. 'Course, don't ever tell anybody that they're not free 'cause then they're gonna get real busy killin' and maimin' to prove to you that they are."

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: An English article on America [Re: TheCaptain]
    #1239261 -

Mr. Mushrooms and Captain, you're both right about the term. It is true, though, that dictionaries tend to list the most common definitions first. Maybe Mr. Mushrooms' distinction would clear up confusion, or maybe context alone will do.

As to the article at hand, I agree with Captain.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: An English article on America [Re: GazzBut]
    #1239291 -

I don't disbelieve you, but I would be interested to see where you got some of this information.

I do believe oil has a large part to play in this war with the Middle East, but I don't believe it is the only reason.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: An English article on America [Re: Anonymous]
    #1239303 -

I'll post some links tommorow.


--------------------
Always Smi2le

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: An English article on America [Re: Anonymous]
    #1239319 -

Here's how I see it--There are plenty of "reasons" to be found to wage a war with a whole list of nations all over the world. Hell, we could probably find something wrong with Samoa.

But Samoa doesn't have anything desirable to the businesses the U.S. government serves. But just you wait--when tapa cloth replaces oil as the world's fuel source, that'll change.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: An English article on America [Re: hongomon]
    #1239474 -

Smartass  :wink:


--------------------
Re-Defeat Bush in '04

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: An English article on America [Re: Anonymous]
    #1239511 -

I do believe oil has a large part to play in this war with the Middle East, but I don't believe it is the only reason.

This is the same pointless nonsense you pulled last time. Are you just going to keep saying "Can you prove it's only for oil and for no other reason?" again?

Do you do your job for one reason? If they stopped paying you would you still go to work? Payment isn't the only reason you go to work but without payment it would be completly pointless right? Just like invading Iraq wouldn't be happening without oil. Understand?


--------------------
Don't worry, B. Caapi

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: An English article on America [Re: Xlea321]
    #1239549 -

Exactly. If you admit it is part of the reason and your govt chooses to flatly deny it in the face of mounting evidence both historical and current what does that tell you?


--------------------
Always Smi2le

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: An English article on America [Re: TheCaptain]
    #1239993 -

You should post the enrtire (sic) definition.... [snip]

Placing Mere in front of the word could also create confusion, and let alone, its not entirely necessary- you understood what I meant

Don't assume and presume to tell me what I understood or didn't understand. The combination of the words together is clear, your meaning was not.

You posts are quite instructive though. Just probably not in the way you mean them to be.

Aye aye Captain! (seldom wrong and never unsure)

[hand snaps briskly to full salute and back down again]

Equivocate away!



Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: An English article on America [Re: Xlea321]
    #1240071 -

It was a mistake to even reply to your post. Sorry Alex, even the lefties on this board know you're an idiot. You're like Bivalve, only on the opposite end of the political spectrum.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Jump to top Pages: | 1 | 2 | 3 |  [ show all ]

Shop: Sporeworks.EU Spores for European Microscopy   North Spore North Spore Mushroom Grow Kits & Cultivation Supplies

General Interest > Political Discussion
Threaded Mode Threaded  Previous topic Previous  View all topics Index  Next topic Next 

Similar ThreadsPosterViewsRepliesLast post
* The September 11 X-Files wingnutx 1,593 9 08/17/03 03:34 AM
by BleaK
* The U.S. Needs to Open Up to the World
( 1 2 3 4 5 6 all )		 ThorA 6,044 101 01/28/03 10:14 PM
by Phred
* (HR 997) English Language Unity Act of 2003 Ellis Dee 957 10 04/16/03 01:24 PM
by Azmodeus
* There is still hope for America
( 1 2 all )		 luvdemshrooms 3,650 39 01/29/04 11:03 PM
by Evolving
* john pilger article - the war of lies goes on mr crisper 848 2 07/05/02 11:59 PM
by ruskifile
* Article I read about bali. Larrythescaryrex 639 6 10/19/02 12:37 AM
by Larrythescaryrex
* Why America Supports Israel
( 1 2 all )		 mntlfngrs 2,973 29 04/05/03 08:18 PM
by Zahid
* Inside America's 'Colossal Blunder'... SquattingMarmot 598 3 09/30/03 12:00 PM
by Xlea321

Extra information
You cannot start new topics / You cannot reply to topics
HTML is disabled / BBCode is enabled
Moderator: Enlil, ballsalsa
4,335 topic views. 3 members, 6 guests and 21 web crawlers are browsing this forum.
[ Show Images Only | Sort by Score | Print Topic ]
Search this thread:

Copyright 1997-2026 Mind Media. Some rights reserved.

Generated in 0.033 seconds spending 0.009 seconds on 18 queries.