Home | Community | Message Board

Mycohaus
This site includes paid links. Please support our sponsors.


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: Kraken Kratom Kratom Capsules for Sale   Unfolding Nature Unfolding Nature: Being in the Implicate Order   Left Coast Kratom Buy Kratom Extract   North Spore Cultivation Supplies   Original Sensible Seeds Autoflowering Cannabis Seeds   Bridgetown Botanicals Bridgetown Botanicals   PhytoExtractum Buy Bali Kratom Powder

Jump to first unread post Pages: 1 | 2 | 3  [ show all ]
InvisibleSwami
Eggshell Walker

Registered: 01/18/00
Posts: 15,413
Loc: In the hen house
Bush: "We can win, no we can't, yes we can"
    #4334600 - 06/25/05 12:05 AM (18 years, 7 months ago)

Winning The War On Terror

Bush claims he can win the war on terror: "One of the interesting things people ask me, now that we're asking questions, is, can you ever win the war on terror? Of course, you can." [President Bush, 4/13/04]

?Bush says war on terror is unwinnable: "I don't think you can win [the war on terror]." [President Bush, 8/30/04]

?Bush says he will win the war on terror: "Make no mistake about it, we are winning and we will win [the war on terror]." [President Bush, 8/31/04]


--------------------



The proof is in the pudding.


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlineotoroko
EsotericIllumination

Registered: 03/30/05
Posts: 61
Last seen: 16 years, 10 months
Re: Bush: "We can win, no we can't, yes we can" [Re: Swami]
    #4334980 - 06/25/05 02:30 AM (18 years, 7 months ago)

Bush is an illuminati puppet. He will say what he is told to say. War on terrorism is war on personal freedom.


--------------------
when you're watching television the higher brain regions (like the midbrain and the neo-cortex) are shut down, and most activity shifts to the lower brain regions (like the limbic system). The right hemisphere is twice as active as the left, a neurological anomaly. The crossover from left to right releases a surge of the body?s natural opiates: endorphins, which include beta-endorphins and enkephalins. Endorphins are structurally identical to opium and its derivatives (morphine, codeine, heroin, etc.).After just 30 seconds of watching television the brain begins to produce alpha waves, which indicates torpid (almost comatose) rates of activity.


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineWhiteRabbitt
Stranger
 User Gallery

Registered: 06/06/02
Posts: 3,486
Last seen: 15 years, 8 months
Re: Bush: "We can win, no we can't, yes we can" [Re: otoroko]
    #4335027 - 06/25/05 02:45 AM (18 years, 7 months ago)

what about those planes crashing into our buildings? Those bombs exploding in our embassys?


--------------------
You gotta jump and swing up to hit me in the knees.



Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineLearyfanS
It's the psychedelic movement!
Male User Gallery

Registered: 04/20/01
Posts: 34,084
Loc: High pride!
Last seen: 1 hour, 58 minutes
Re: Bush: "We can win, no we can't, yes we can" [Re: Swami]
    #4335250 - 06/25/05 06:52 AM (18 years, 7 months ago)

I look forward to the day that Bush tells the American people that we've killed the world's last terrorist and that everything is safe again. Until that happens, I'll do anything he asks of me.








--------------------
--------------------------------


Mp3 of the month:  The Apple-Glass Cyndrome - Someday



Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Invisibleniteowl
GrandPaw
Male User Gallery

Registered: 07/01/03
Posts: 16,291
Loc: Flag
Re: Bush: "We can win, no we can't, yes we can" [Re: Learyfan]
    #4335371 - 06/25/05 08:35 AM (18 years, 7 months ago)

Quote:

Learyfan said:
I look forward to the day that Bush tells the American people that we've killed the world's last terrorist and that everything is safe again. Until that happens, I'll do anything he asks of me.





:rolleyes:
I hope that was sarcasm


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineLearyfanS
It's the psychedelic movement!
Male User Gallery

Registered: 04/20/01
Posts: 34,084
Loc: High pride!
Last seen: 1 hour, 58 minutes
Re: Bush: "We can win, no we can't, yes we can" [Re: niteowl]
    #4335390 - 06/25/05 08:46 AM (18 years, 7 months ago)

No, I'm serious.  It's the same thing with the war on drugs.  I'm sure pretty soon the government will announce that all illegal drugs have been eradicated forever.  Why would they start a "war" that can't be won?  :confused:








--------------------
--------------------------------


Mp3 of the month:  The Apple-Glass Cyndrome - Someday



Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlineotoroko
EsotericIllumination

Registered: 03/30/05
Posts: 61
Last seen: 16 years, 10 months
Re: Bush: "We can win, no we can't, yes we can" [Re: WhiteRabbitt]
    #4335557 - 06/25/05 10:31 AM (18 years, 7 months ago)

Quote:

WhiteRabbitt said:
what about those planes crashing into our buildings? Those bombs exploding in our embassys?




Look deeper into it, same people. Like invading countries because of weapons you sold them...


--------------------
when you're watching television the higher brain regions (like the midbrain and the neo-cortex) are shut down, and most activity shifts to the lower brain regions (like the limbic system). The right hemisphere is twice as active as the left, a neurological anomaly. The crossover from left to right releases a surge of the body?s natural opiates: endorphins, which include beta-endorphins and enkephalins. Endorphins are structurally identical to opium and its derivatives (morphine, codeine, heroin, etc.).After just 30 seconds of watching television the brain begins to produce alpha waves, which indicates torpid (almost comatose) rates of activity.


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflinePhred
Fred's son
Male

Registered: 10/18/00
Posts: 12,949
Loc: Dominican Republic
Last seen: 9 years, 17 days
Re: Bush: "We can win, no we can't, yes we can" [Re: Learyfan]
    #4335621 - 06/25/05 10:58 AM (18 years, 7 months ago)

Quote:

I look forward to the day that Bush tells the American people that we've killed the world's last terrorist and that everything is safe again.




Do you look forward to that day as eagerly as you look forward to the day the Attorney General tells the American people we've imprisoned America's last rapist?



Phred


--------------------


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineRedstorm
Prince of Bugs
Male

Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 10/08/02
Posts: 44,175
Last seen: 3 months, 10 days
Re: Bush: "We can win, no we can't, yes we can" [Re: Phred]
    #4335627 - 06/25/05 11:01 AM (18 years, 7 months ago)

Quote:

Phred said:
Quote:

I look forward to the day that Bush tells the American people that we've killed the world's last terrorist and that everything is safe again.




Do you look forward to that day as eagerly as you look forward to the day the Attorney General tells the American people we've imprisoned America's last rapist?





The day we catch the last rapist comes after the day we free all of the resources used to arrest and house non-violent drug offenders.


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflinePhred
Fred's son
Male

Registered: 10/18/00
Posts: 12,949
Loc: Dominican Republic
Last seen: 9 years, 17 days
Re: Bush: "We can win, no we can't, yes we can" [Re: otoroko]
    #4335628 - 06/25/05 11:01 AM (18 years, 7 months ago)

otoroko writes:

Quote:

Like invading countries because of weapons you sold them...




And which countries would those be?



Phred


--------------------


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineRedstorm
Prince of Bugs
Male

Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 10/08/02
Posts: 44,175
Last seen: 3 months, 10 days
Re: Bush: "We can win, no we can't, yes we can" [Re: Phred]
    #4335632 - 06/25/05 11:02 AM (18 years, 7 months ago)

Stop being coy. Though it's not why we went to war with them, you damn well know he's talking about Iraq.


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflinePhred
Fred's son
Male

Registered: 10/18/00
Posts: 12,949
Loc: Dominican Republic
Last seen: 9 years, 17 days
Re: Bush: "We can win, no we can't, yes we can" [Re: Redstorm]
    #4335640 - 06/25/05 11:07 AM (18 years, 7 months ago)

He can't be talking about Iraq, since the US government sold no prohibited weaponry to Iraq, and very little weaponry of any sort, for that matter.

Less than one per cent of Hussein's armaments were of American manufacture. The bulk of it was Russian and French. This is a matter of public record, which is why I asked the question.



Phred


--------------------


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Invisibleniteowl
GrandPaw
Male User Gallery

Registered: 07/01/03
Posts: 16,291
Loc: Flag
Re: Bush: "We can win, no we can't, yes we can" [Re: Learyfan]
    #4335642 - 06/25/05 11:08 AM (18 years, 7 months ago)

Quote:

Learyfan said:
No, I'm serious.  It's the same thing with the war on drugs.  I'm sure pretty soon the government will announce that all illegal drugs have been eradicated forever.  Why would they start a "war" that can't be won?  :confused:




:rolleyes:

Quote:

Learyfan said:
Quote:

camelsmoker said:
I know I'm on probation for 2 years and i gotta pay 50 bucks a month for that whole to years for probation fees i got random drug tests that cost money and 800 dollar fine for actually having the weed and i gotta take an 80 dollar course on drugs and shit they make more money off of you busting u why would they make it legal?  people would grow it anyway...the government is just fucked up like that ..hypocritical fascists!!!!




Cha-CHING!  :sad:





To make money off people :shrug:

This "War on Drugs" has been going on for 30+ years now and until the law changes this "war" will never end.

Quote:

Learyfan said:
I look forward to the day that Bush tells the American people that we've killed the world's last terrorist and that everything is safe again. Until that happens, I'll do anything he asks of me.





:lol:

Then you need to stop using drugs.




Oh yea, you need to turn in everyone you know that is using drugs too.......:rotfl:


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineRedstorm
Prince of Bugs
Male

Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 10/08/02
Posts: 44,175
Last seen: 3 months, 10 days
Re: Bush: "We can win, no we can't, yes we can" [Re: Phred]
    #4335658 - 06/25/05 11:20 AM (18 years, 7 months ago)

Quote:

Phred said:
and very little weaponry of any sort, for that matter.





Quote:

Representative Samuel Gejdenson, Democrat of Connecticut, chairman of a House subcommittee investigating "United States Exports of Sensitive Technology to Iraq," stated in 1991:

"From 1985 to 1990, the United States Government approved 771 licenses for the export to Iraq of $1.5 billion worth of biological agents and high-tech equipment with military application. [Only thirty-nine applications were rejected.]





http://www.indybay.org/news/2002/03/119547.php

Quote:

Key

A = nuclear weapon program
B = biological weapon program
C = chemical weapon program
R = rocket program
K = conventional weapons, military logistics, supplies at the Iraqi Ministry of Defense, and building of military plants



USA

1. Honeywell (R, K)

2. Spectra Physics (K)

3. Semetex (R)

4. TI Coating (A, K)

5. Unisys (A, K)

6. Sperry Corp. (R, K)

7. Tektronix (R, A)

8. Rockwell (K)

9. Leybold Vacuum Systems (A)

10. Finnigan-MAT-US (A)

11. Hewlett-Packard (A, R, K)

12. Dupont (A)

13. Eastman Kodak (R)

14. American Type Culture Collection (B)

15. Alcolac International (C)

16. Consarc (A)

17. Carl Zeiss - U.S (K)

18. Cerberus (LTD) (A)

19. Electronic Associates (R)

20. International Computer Systems (A, R, K)

21. Bechtel (K)

22. EZ Logic Data Systems, Inc. (R)

23. Canberra Industries Inc. (A)

24. Axel Electronics Inc. (A)

"In addition to these 24 companies home-based in the USA are 50 subsidiaries of foreign enterprises which conducted their arms business with Iraq from within the US. Also designated as suppliers for Iraq's arms programs (A, B, C & R) are the US Ministries of Defense, Energy, Trade and Agriculture as well as the Lawrence Livermore, Los Alamos and Sandia National Laboratories."




http://www.thememoryhole.org/corp/iraq-suppliers.htm

That doesn't look like very little weaponry to me.


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflinePhred
Fred's son
Male

Registered: 10/18/00
Posts: 12,949
Loc: Dominican Republic
Last seen: 9 years, 17 days
Re: Bush: "We can win, no we can't, yes we can" [Re: Redstorm]
    #4336050 - 06/25/05 01:21 PM (18 years, 7 months ago)

Read what is actually written in the link you provided.

It doesn't describe weapons, it describes equipment with possible (and I stress "possible") use in military applications.

Note that "biological agents" refer to everything from nutrient media to reference cultures.

The US has never provided VX or Sarin or mustard gas or any other nerve gas to Iraq. To the best of my knowledge, neither has any other country. Iraq synthesized it all on their own.

As for non-NBC weaponry, I have yet to find anything at all provided to Iraq by the US government. No fighters, no tanks, no assault rifles, no artillery pieces, no uniforms, boots, ammunition, or sidearms. No helicopters. No missiles, no mortars.

Note further the list of companies and then investigate what kind of equipment they actually manufacture. Zeiss, for example, makes microscopes and other optics. Hewlett Packard makes spectrum analyzers and oscilloscopes. Leybold vacuum systems makes vacuum pumps. To call any of that "weaponry" is to stretch the definition of "weaponry" till it no longer has any real meaning.

Finally, if you think 1.5 billion is a large amount, remember that over sixty other countries provided similar equipment -- including Sweden. The great majority of those countries provided far more (in dollar terms) than did the US.




Phred


--------------------


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineRedstorm
Prince of Bugs
Male

Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 10/08/02
Posts: 44,175
Last seen: 3 months, 10 days
Re: Bush: "We can win, no we can't, yes we can" [Re: Phred]
    #4336073 - 06/25/05 01:26 PM (18 years, 7 months ago)

I don't doubt your statments, but could you drag me up some sources? I am only moderately knowledgable in this area, and if what you say is true, I'd like to read it for myself. I'm sure you don't mind.


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflinePhred
Fred's son
Male

Registered: 10/18/00
Posts: 12,949
Loc: Dominican Republic
Last seen: 9 years, 17 days
Re: Bush: "We can win, no we can't, yes we can" [Re: Redstorm]
    #4336586 - 06/25/05 04:30 PM (18 years, 7 months ago)

Plenty of info as well as plenty of links in these two threads, especially in the first post in the thread.

http://www.shroomery.org/archives/showfl...rue#Post2005324

http://www.shroomery.org/archives/showfl...rue#Post1387485



It's worth reading through each of the threads all the way through, though, since additional info is often found in the replies to the opening post.

As a side note, this is why I sometimes get snippy when asked over and over and over again to provide sources for my statements. Everything -- and I do mean everything -- that is being rehashed in the last few days in the most active threads has been verified and reverified countless times over the last three years or so in this forum. All of these spurious claims I'm spending time re-debunking this week have been so thoroughly debunked by myself and a dozen others in this very forum that I tend to lose patience with people asking me to back myself up for the thirtieth time. I have to remind myself that some of the newer members are coming late to the party and that they honestly haven't seen this stuff before, because you'll never see it in the Leftie Mainstream Media news programs or newspapers -- you have to put a bit of effort into finding it.

What really grinds my gears is when I get these same requests from older members I know have seen this stuff before and are just trying to make me work for nothing. When I get a request from a veteran poster to provide a link to something I know he's seen before (often because he responded to the original thread in which it appeared) I have an extremely hard time following the "no flaming rule". That's just plain rude behavior on the part of the person involved, and does them no credit whatsoever.

I don't have unlimited time to track down all this stuff again every few weeks for new members. As it happens, in this case I could remember the title of one of the threads ("Who armed Iraq") and I remembered the name of the poster in the other case (Wingnutx, who has made only 200 posts) so a search of the archives was pretty straightforward and not particularly time-consuming. This isn't always the case. Also, the search engine here is less than perfect -- sometimes for no apparent reason it will completely miss posts with the necessary key words. Yes, I could always Google something, but with Google one ends up searching sometimes tens of thousands of URLs rather than a few dozen or a few hundred archived posts here.

As a parting observation, let me point out just how easy it is (now that we have such a thing as the wonderful intraweb) to debunk the common claims repeated by the Leftist moonbats so often that they are accepted uncritically by those too naive to do their own verification. None of the information provided in the threads linked above was particularly difficult to find, and none of it is disputable. Yet tens (if not hundreds) of millions of Lefties around the world have been so thoroughly brainwashed by the Noam Chomskys and Michael Moores and Greg Palasts and Paul Krugmans of the world that it never occurs to them that the most commonly accepted "facts" these nutbars spew...

-- the US "installed" Hussein
-- the US provided Hussein WMDs
-- the US armed Hussein to the teeth
-- various European intelligence agencies "knew" pre-March/2003 that there were no WMDs in Iraq
-- UN sanctions killed a million Iraqi infants
-- and dozens more

... are pure unadulterated bullshit. It seems that anyone who makes an oh-so-clever remark comparing Bush to Hitler gains automatic "can-never-be-wrong" status in the eyes of these poor souls whose brains have been turned to mush in government schools:

"Dewd, he says Bush is a smirking chimp, haw haw haw! If he's smart enough to spot that, he just has to be right about all this other shit, dewd. Like, totally!"

Redstorm, I'm not including you in the group described above, don't worry. I realize you are honestly trying to gather as much information on these things as you can, and I appreciate that. I just find it sad you have to ask for sources to these things. If the fucking press weren't so relentlessly anti-American, all this stuff would be common knowledge. Fortunately, thanks to the net, we no longer need to rely on whatever the legacy media decides to push while remaining gnorant of what they decide to bury. We can -- with just a little bit of effort -- go straight to the source.



Phred


--------------------


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineLearyfanS
It's the psychedelic movement!
Male User Gallery

Registered: 04/20/01
Posts: 34,084
Loc: High pride!
Last seen: 1 hour, 58 minutes
Re: Bush: "We can win, no we can't, yes we can" [Re: niteowl]
    #4338701 - 06/26/05 08:17 AM (18 years, 7 months ago)

Niteowl, you and Phred can laugh all you want. Soon you will see Mr. Bush bring the last terrorist to justice and destroy the last drug. I don't expect him to bring the last rapist to justice because he hasn't declared war on rape. I assume because the government feels that the war on rape can't be won.





--------------------
--------------------------------


Mp3 of the month:  The Apple-Glass Cyndrome - Someday



Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Invisibleniteowl
GrandPaw
Male User Gallery

Registered: 07/01/03
Posts: 16,291
Loc: Flag
Re: Bush: "We can win, no we can't, yes we can" [Re: Learyfan]
    #4338899 - 06/26/05 10:31 AM (18 years, 7 months ago)

Again you mis-speak.

You should have said:
Quote:

Learyfan said:
Niteowl, you and Phred can laugh all you want.  Soon you will see Mr. Bush bring the last radical Muslim to justice......




I might buy that reasoning, but to say that Bush can stop terrorism WORLD WIDE, is foolish.

All it takes for someone to become a terrorist, is to get pissed off at the system enuf to fight back. Is Bush going to end anger the world over :rolleyes: ......hardly. If anything he is making terrorism WORSE by his actions not better.




The war on drugs has been going on for 30+ years now with NO END IN SITE. How is Bush going to "destroy the last drug" in his remaining 3 years?

The ONLY way, that could be done, that quick, is to nuke every nation on the face of the earth except the good old USA.

Your comments lately have been highly asinine and makes me wonder if you have been possessed by some Christian fundamentalist........:confused:


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineLearyfanS
It's the psychedelic movement!
Male User Gallery

Registered: 04/20/01
Posts: 34,084
Loc: High pride!
Last seen: 1 hour, 58 minutes
Re: Bush: "We can win, no we can't, yes we can" [Re: niteowl]
    #4338953 - 06/26/05 11:03 AM (18 years, 7 months ago)

Dude!!!!!!

I'm trying to give you hints that I'm kidding!  Sorry to mislead you, but I figured you'd catch on that I'm joking.  :grin:





--------------------
--------------------------------


Mp3 of the month:  The Apple-Glass Cyndrome - Someday



Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleLos_Pepes
Stranger

Registered: 06/26/05
Posts: 731
Re: Bush: "We can win, no we can't, yes we can" [Re: Swami]
    #4339010 - 06/26/05 11:32 AM (18 years, 7 months ago)

It always helps if you have super powers



Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Invisibleniteowl
GrandPaw
Male User Gallery

Registered: 07/01/03
Posts: 16,291
Loc: Flag
Re: Bush: "We can win, no we can't, yes we can" [Re: Learyfan]
    #4340109 - 06/26/05 07:05 PM (18 years, 7 months ago)

Well I kinda thought that you were kidding at first and even asked if you were. When you said that you weren't kidding. I took you seriously.

I'm kinda dense at times  :tongue:......I was reading your words and not paying any attention to the pix you were posting.

:sorry:

:peace: :peace: :peace:


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineLearyfanS
It's the psychedelic movement!
Male User Gallery

Registered: 04/20/01
Posts: 34,084
Loc: High pride!
Last seen: 1 hour, 58 minutes
Re: Bush: "We can win, no we can't, yes we can" [Re: niteowl]
    #4340248 - 06/26/05 07:59 PM (18 years, 7 months ago)

:grin:

It's cool. :rasta:






--------------------
--------------------------------


Mp3 of the month:  The Apple-Glass Cyndrome - Someday



Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlinelonestar2004
Live to party,work to affordit.
 User Gallery

Registered: 10/03/04
Posts: 8,978
Loc: South Texas
Last seen: 12 years, 9 months
Re: Bush: "We can win, no we can't, yes we can" [Re: Swami]
    #4340628 - 06/26/05 09:44 PM (18 years, 7 months ago)

Hey Swami The War is over and We Won.




The War is Over, and We Won
The American Enterprise Online ^ | 6/20/05 | Karl Zinsmeister


http://www.theamericanenterprise.org/issues/articleID.18615/article_detail.asp

Your editor returned to Iraq in April and May of 2005 for another embedded period of reporting. I could immediately see improvements compared to my earlier extended tours during 2003 and 2004. The Iraqi security forces, for example, are vastly more competent, and in some cases quite inspiring. Baghdad is now choked with traffic. Cell phones have spread like wildfire. And satellite TV dishes sprout from even the most humble mud hovels in the countryside.

Many of the soldiers I spent time with during this spring had also been deployed during the initial invasion back in 2003. Almost universally they talked to me about how much change they could see in the country. They noted progress in the attitudes of the people, in the condition of important infrastructure, in security.

I observed many examples of this myself. Take the two very different Baghdad neighborhoods of Haifa Street and Sadr City. The first is an upper-end commercial district in the heart of downtown. The second is one of Baghdad?s worst slums, on the city?s north edge.

I spent lots of time walking both neighborhoods this spring?something that would not have been possible a year earlier, when both were active war zones, where tanks poured shells into buildings on a regular basis. Today, the primary work of our soldiers in each area is rebuilding sewers, paving roads, getting buildings repaired and secured, supplying schools and hospitals, getting trash picked up, managing traffic, and encouraging honest local governance.

What the establishment media covering Iraq have utterly failed to make clear today is this central reality: With the exception of periodic flare-ups in isolated corners, our struggle in Iraq as warfare is over. Egregious acts of terror will continue?in Iraq as in many other parts of the world. But there is now no chance whatever of the U.S. losing this critical guerilla war.

Contrary to the impression given by most newspaper headlines, the United States has won the day in Iraq. In 2004, our military fought fierce battles in Najaf, Fallujah, and Sadr City. Many thousands of terrorists were killed, with comparatively little collateral damage. As examples of the very hardest sorts of urban combat, these will go down in history as smashing U.S. victories.

And our successes at urban combat (which, scandalously, are mostly untold stories in the U.S.) made it crystal clear to both the terrorists and the millions of moderate Iraqis that the insurgents simply cannot win against today?s U.S. Army and Marines. That?s why everyday citizens have surged into politics instead.

The terrorist struggle has hardly ended. Even a very small number of vicious men operating in secret will find opportunities to blow up outdoor markets and public buildings, assassinate prominent political figures, and knock down office towers. But public opinion is not on the insurgents? side, and the battle of Iraq is no longer one of war fighting?but of policing and politics.

Policing and political problem-solving are mostly tasks for Iraqis, not Americans. And the Iraqis are taking them up, often with gusto. I saw much evidence that responsible Iraqis are gradually isolating the small but dangerously nihilistic minority trying to strangle their new society. With each passing month, U.S. forces will more and more become a kind of SWAT team that intervenes only to multiply the force of the emerging Iraqi security forces, and otherwise stays mostly in the background.

Increasingly, the Iraqi people are taking direction of their own lives. And like all other self-ruling populations, they are more interested in improving the quality of their lives than in mindless warring. It will take some time, but Iraq has begun the process of becoming a normal country.

Karl Zinsmeister is the Editor-in-Chief of The American Enterprise.


--------------------
America's debt problem is a "sign of leadership failure"

We have "reckless fiscal policies"

America has a debt problem and a failure of leadership.

Americans deserve better

Barack Obama


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Invisibletrick

Registered: 10/22/04
Posts: 1,059
Loc: unknown
Re: Bush: "We can win, no we can't, yes we can" [Re: lonestar2004]
    #4541883 - 08/16/05 10:24 AM (18 years, 5 months ago)

Many thousands of terrorists were killed, with comparatively little collateral damage.


http://www.iraqbodycount.net/


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineProsgeopax
Jaded, yethopeful?

Registered: 01/28/05 Happy 19th Shroomiversary!
Posts: 1,258
Loc: Appearing at a mall near ...
Last seen: 18 years, 1 month
Re: Bush: "We can win, no we can't, yes we can" [Re: lonestar2004]
    #4542030 - 08/16/05 11:23 AM (18 years, 5 months ago)

Quote:

lonestar2004 said:
Hey Swami The War is over and We Won.



Guerrilla wars apparently don't count in some people's fantasy world. The sorry fact is that if you do not have peace, the war is not over.

Check out these stats, maybe you could tell the dead U.S. servicemen's families that the war has been over since our chickenhawk-in-chief strutted under the banner proclaiming, 'Mission Accomplished.'


Here's the link to where the table was taken from.


--------------------
Money doesn't grow on trees, but deficits do grow under Bushes.

You can accept, reject, or examine and test any new idea that comes to you. The wise man chooses the third way.
- Tom Willhite

Disclaimer: I reserve the right to change my opinions should I become aware of additional facts, the falsification of information or different perspectives. Articles written by others which I post may not necessarily reflect my opinions in part or in whole, my opinions may be in direct opposition, the topic may be one on which I have yet to formulate an opinion or have doubts about, an article may be posted solely with the intent to stimulate discussion or contemplation.


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineMagicalMystery
turn off yourmind

Registered: 07/27/05
Posts: 1,740
Loc: Here, there and everywher...
Last seen: 18 years, 2 months
Re: Bush: "We can win, no we can't, yes we can" [Re: Swami]
    #4542699 - 08/16/05 02:16 PM (18 years, 5 months ago)

Where did the quote "We can win, no we can't, yes we can" come from? If it's a paraphrasing, you can't use quotation marks to make it seem as if it were one statement.


--------------------

"Men trained in arms from their infancy, and animated by the love of liberty, will afford neither a cheap or easy conquest."
From the Declaration of the Continental Congress

"We can have peace and security only as long as we band together to preserve that most priceless possession, our inheritance of European blood."
Charles A. Lindbergh,"Aviation, Geography, and Race", Reader's Digest, Nov. 1939

"We must secure the existance of our people and a future for White children."
David Lane


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineLearyfanS
It's the psychedelic movement!
Male User Gallery

Registered: 04/20/01
Posts: 34,084
Loc: High pride!
Last seen: 1 hour, 58 minutes
Re: Bush: "We can win, no we can't, yes we can" [Re: trick]
    #4542769 - 08/16/05 02:40 PM (18 years, 5 months ago)

Quote:

trick said:
Many thousands of terrorists were killed, with comparatively little collateral damage.


http://www.iraqbodycount.net/




Accept for stretching our military paper thin, wasting billions and billions of tax dollars, creating many times the "terrorists" we killed and severely damaging the American government's credibility, I'd say you're right. Of course, all of the things I've mentioned will also hurt our ability to fight a real enemy when the time comes.








--------------------
--------------------------------


Mp3 of the month:  The Apple-Glass Cyndrome - Someday



Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlinelonestar2004
Live to party,work to affordit.
 User Gallery

Registered: 10/03/04
Posts: 8,978
Loc: South Texas
Last seen: 12 years, 9 months
Re: Bush: "We can win, no we can't, yes we can" [Re: Prosgeopax]
    #4542890 - 08/16/05 03:27 PM (18 years, 5 months ago)

I am sad for the 58 dead soldiers we lost last month.

and I am sad for the 3000 civilians we lost in one day.


interesting site/link. I am sure a lot of the libs/Dem's touch themselves when they go to that site.


--------------------
America's debt problem is a "sign of leadership failure"

We have "reckless fiscal policies"

America has a debt problem and a failure of leadership.

Americans deserve better

Barack Obama


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineProsgeopax
Jaded, yethopeful?

Registered: 01/28/05 Happy 19th Shroomiversary!
Posts: 1,258
Loc: Appearing at a mall near ...
Last seen: 18 years, 1 month
Re: Bush: "We can win, no we can't, yes we can" [Re: lonestar2004]
    #4542953 - 08/16/05 04:00 PM (18 years, 5 months ago)

Quote:

lonestar2004 said:
I am sad for the 58 dead soldiers we lost last month.

and I am sad for the 3000 civilians we lost in one day.



What do 3000 civilians lost (I presume you mean 9/11) have to do with Iraq? These are two separate issues.

Quote:

I am sure a lot of the libs/Dem's touch themselves when they go to that site.



I would expect such a comment to come from someone experiencing the early throes of puberty... or an Ann Coulter wannabe.


--------------------
Money doesn't grow on trees, but deficits do grow under Bushes.

You can accept, reject, or examine and test any new idea that comes to you. The wise man chooses the third way.
- Tom Willhite

Disclaimer: I reserve the right to change my opinions should I become aware of additional facts, the falsification of information or different perspectives. Articles written by others which I post may not necessarily reflect my opinions in part or in whole, my opinions may be in direct opposition, the topic may be one on which I have yet to formulate an opinion or have doubts about, an article may be posted solely with the intent to stimulate discussion or contemplation.


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineMagicalMystery
turn off yourmind

Registered: 07/27/05
Posts: 1,740
Loc: Here, there and everywher...
Last seen: 18 years, 2 months
Re: Bush: "We can win, no we can't, yes we can" [Re: Prosgeopax]
    #4543084 - 08/16/05 04:52 PM (18 years, 5 months ago)

Quote:

Prosgeopax said:
Guerrilla wars apparently don't count in some people's fantasy world. The sorry fact is that if you do not have peace, the war is not over.




It's impossible to destroy all guerillas in any given conflict. One could postulate that since the militia groups and anti-government ideology that spawned the McVeigh style attackers still exist, we haven't 'won' that war. Sometimes it's more important to fight the war than to be able to claim 'victory'.
Quote:


Check out these stats, maybe you could tell the dead U.S. servicemen's families that the war has been over since our chickenhawk-in-chief strutted under the banner proclaiming, 'Mission Accomplished.'




The mission of overthrowing the government was established. What do you see as the mission? The total absense of any violence what-so-ever in Iraq? That will never be accomplished. Most servicemen, and their families, support the war efforts.


--------------------

"Men trained in arms from their infancy, and animated by the love of liberty, will afford neither a cheap or easy conquest."
From the Declaration of the Continental Congress

"We can have peace and security only as long as we band together to preserve that most priceless possession, our inheritance of European blood."
Charles A. Lindbergh,"Aviation, Geography, and Race", Reader's Digest, Nov. 1939

"We must secure the existance of our people and a future for White children."
David Lane


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlinezappaisgod
horrid asshole

Registered: 02/11/04
Posts: 81,741
Loc: Fractallife's gym
Last seen: 7 years, 7 months
Re: Bush: "We can win, no we can't, yes we can" [Re: Prosgeopax]
    #4543303 - 08/16/05 05:50 PM (18 years, 5 months ago)

Quote:

Prosgeopax said:
Quote:

lonestar2004 said:
I am sad for the 58 dead soldiers we lost last month.

and I am sad for the 3000 civilians we lost in one day.



What do 3000 civilians lost (I presume you mean 9/11) have to do with Iraq? These are two separate issues.




And this is where we will never see eye to eye. I think that they are exactly equivalent because there has been a perceived weakness and lack of resolution of the USA which has led each of these scumbags to think we will not act no matter how they fuck with us. Impugn this bitches. Jimmy Carter is (or should be) dead! Act up at your peril. We aint eatin' it no mo'


--------------------


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineLearyfanS
It's the psychedelic movement!
Male User Gallery

Registered: 04/20/01
Posts: 34,084
Loc: High pride!
Last seen: 1 hour, 58 minutes
Re: Bush: "We can win, no we can't, yes we can" [Re: Prosgeopax]
    #4543664 - 08/16/05 07:37 PM (18 years, 5 months ago)

Quote:

Prosgeopax said:
Quote:

lonestar2004 said:
I am sad for the 58 dead soldiers we lost last month.

and I am sad for the 3000 civilians we lost in one day.



What do 3000 civilians lost (I presume you mean 9/11) have to do with Iraq? These are two separate issues.





^This is a good example of how The White House morphed Bin Laden into Hussein in the minds of the American people. The work they've done in that respect is brilliant. Even I gotta say "hat's off".







--------------------
--------------------------------


Mp3 of the month:  The Apple-Glass Cyndrome - Someday



Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineBoneMan
Shrimpin ain't easy
Male

Registered: 02/09/05
Posts: 2,032
Loc: new new england
Last seen: 12 years, 2 months
Re: Bush: "We can win, no we can't, yes we can" [Re: Learyfan]
    #4544350 - 08/16/05 10:23 PM (18 years, 5 months ago)

i think george bush must have had one of his advisors read him 1984, or at least get him the book on tape..


"...the consequences of being at war, and therefore in danger, makes the handing-over of all power to a small caste seem the natural, unavoidable condition of survival." - George Orwell, 1984

the U.S government seems quite fond of waging wars that can't be decisively won (terrorism, drugs), therefore the wars become perpetual and we hand over more and more power and give up more and more of our rights to our "protectors"


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleRavus
Not an EggshellWalker
 User Gallery

Registered: 07/18/03
Posts: 7,991
Loc: Cave of the Patriarchs
Re: Bush: "We can win, no we can't, yes we can" [Re: BoneMan]
    #4544553 - 08/16/05 11:08 PM (18 years, 5 months ago)

I don't think so; Orwell was a much better writer than Bush's speeches will ever be. I think this is an example of convergent evolution. :wink:


--------------------
So long as you are praised think only that you are not yet on your own path but on that of another.


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlineblackkrishna
Stranger

Registered: 08/16/05
Posts: 9
Last seen: 18 years, 5 months
Re: Bush: "We can win, no we can't, yes we can" [Re: Ravus]
    #4545053 - 08/17/05 12:51 AM (18 years, 5 months ago)

here's a weapon... :smile:

peace,
BK


9/11: Amnesty Intellectual (It's about time.)


President Bush looks very relaxed at his Crawford ranch, while many people in the United States and the rest of the World are frightened and confused: what's going to happen next? How come we have no predictability? How come we disagree over facts until we have no idea what's going on?

With 9/11 coming up again, perhaps a bit of history will help.

In fact...


President George W. Bush spoke to the World before the UN General Assembly on November 10, 2001:


"Let us never tolerate outrageous conspiracy theories concerning the attacks of September the 11th, malicious lies that attempt to shift the blame away from the terrorists themselves, away from the guilty."


Throughout the corridors of power around the world, a clear message was sent: shut up.


It came in a million lies of attack from The White House, many since disproven, and was echoed proudly by a bought, scared and humbled corporate media. Despite a Zogby Poll (Oct. 04) saying 50% of New Yorkers believe the government had prior knowledge of 9/11 and consciously failed to act, and millions of decent honest people feeling this everywhere else, there is still substantial peer pressure to deny any other possibilities.

Why?

Why do we rationalize: "They probably knew something + but I'm not sure what." as a satisfactory answer?

Why is that a good place to stop when the answer could satisfy so many questions?

When it could bring the world together?

It's crazy how much credibility one gets from just saying: "Well I'm not one for conspiracy theories...", no matter the nonsense or sins of omission that follow. Our herded gullibility buys fake credibility, and even though Fahrenheit 9/11 recently showed millions the media lies to protect the government from the people, we still fight to defend half-truths we learned against concerned citizens with a wealth of evidence they worked like hell to find.

(sigh)

So: an all-purpose argument for anybody to tell everybody...


Martial Law 9/11: Rise of the Police State (2005)


Downloaded: 5000 times


SOURCE - www.archive.org/details/MartialLaw911


MARTIAL LAW 911: RISE OF THE POLICE STATE Information Resource Companion Web Site.

SOURCE - www.martiallaw911.info/index.htm


(...)


THE TOP 10 REASONS WHY YOU SHOULD WATCH IT


1) All information we receive is based on editorial decisions, including the repetition of a good story, like celebrity scandals. Here the footage, interviews and documents culled from hundreds of mainstream news sources is real, including foreign press, live TV slip-ups, or just great stories that got buried. This is as "real" as anything else we believe, and the use of 80% mainstream "news" sources makes this "news", not blind theorizing.

2) The militarization of security is troubling, especially when they don't tell us about it. This movie shows where America may be going, and the attacks on the Constitution and plans for the World are crazy. Whether it gets there or not is certainly debatable, but this film establishes clear intent. Widespread information may provoke public outrage, if it's done in secret it'll be impossible to stop.

3) "Qui bono" is latin for "who profits", and this film establishes the money to be made from their actions. The rich making billions of dollars off war and increased security are intimately connected to the senior members of the government, and this film is being given away for free by the people who care to expose it...

blackkrishna.blogspot.com...about.html


Peace, (NOW!!!)
BK

_________________

...

Black Krishna Brand

Philosophy - blackkrishna.blogspot.com/

Music - www.soundclick.com/bands/0/blackkrishna.htm

...


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineProsgeopax
Jaded, yethopeful?

Registered: 01/28/05 Happy 19th Shroomiversary!
Posts: 1,258
Loc: Appearing at a mall near ...
Last seen: 18 years, 1 month
Re: Bush: "We can win, no we can't, yes we can" [Re: zappaisgod]
    #4546701 - 08/17/05 12:53 PM (18 years, 5 months ago)

Quote:

zappaisgod said:
And this is where we will never see eye to eye.



That would require that you open your eyes.

Quote:

I think that they are exactly equivalent because there has been a perceived weakness and lack of resolution of the USA which has led each of these scumbags to think we will not act no matter how they fuck with us.



Huh? That makes about as much sense as beating up a paraplegic to demonstrate to members of the gang that attacked you before that you mean business.


--------------------
Money doesn't grow on trees, but deficits do grow under Bushes.

You can accept, reject, or examine and test any new idea that comes to you. The wise man chooses the third way.
- Tom Willhite

Disclaimer: I reserve the right to change my opinions should I become aware of additional facts, the falsification of information or different perspectives. Articles written by others which I post may not necessarily reflect my opinions in part or in whole, my opinions may be in direct opposition, the topic may be one on which I have yet to formulate an opinion or have doubts about, an article may be posted solely with the intent to stimulate discussion or contemplation.


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineProsgeopax
Jaded, yethopeful?

Registered: 01/28/05 Happy 19th Shroomiversary!
Posts: 1,258
Loc: Appearing at a mall near ...
Last seen: 18 years, 1 month
Re: Bush: "We can win, no we can't, yes we can" [Re: MagicalMystery]
    #4546832 - 08/17/05 01:32 PM (18 years, 5 months ago)

Quote:

MagicalMystery said:
It's impossible to destroy all guerillas in any given conflict.



I wouldn't say impossible, though the odds might be high depending upon the conflict and the support for the guerrillas among the general populace.

Quote:

One could postulate that since the militia groups and anti-government ideology that spawned the McVeigh style attackers still exist, we haven't 'won' that war.



That was not a war and there have been no other attacks that I know of. McVeigh was not the member of any militia and most if not all militias have publicly condemned his actions. McVeigh and Nichols attend two Militia of Michigan meetings and were told to leave because they were advocating violence. McVeigh learned the craft of killing in the U.S. Army in Iraq, in whose employ he also learned to accept 'collateral damage' as being justified.

Quote:

Sometimes it's more important to fight the war than to be able to claim 'victory'.



What? Claims of victory are not important, cessation of organized hostilities are. What the hell is the point of fighting a war if there is no goal?

Quote:

The mission of overthrowing the government was established.



Was that the mission? I thought it was to prevent a mushroom cloud over the U.S.? Oh, no wait, was it to liberate the Iraqi people? No wait, wasn't it to create more terrorists? You're right, mission accomplished.

Quote:

Most servicemen, and their families, support the war efforts.



What does that really mean, 'support the war effort'? For many people that may mean supporting their loved ones in carrying out their sworn duties and hoping they come back alive. Some of these same people may feel that that war was unwarranted in the first place. I know a few people like this myself (including family). Since it can lead to a disciplinary action for active duty personnel to publicly express an opinion against the chickenhawk-in-chief, I wouldn't be too confident in any figures regarding such individuals that you may have in support of that assertion. Regardless, the number of adherents to a particular position is no determinant of whether or not it is the correct position.


--------------------
Money doesn't grow on trees, but deficits do grow under Bushes.

You can accept, reject, or examine and test any new idea that comes to you. The wise man chooses the third way.
- Tom Willhite

Disclaimer: I reserve the right to change my opinions should I become aware of additional facts, the falsification of information or different perspectives. Articles written by others which I post may not necessarily reflect my opinions in part or in whole, my opinions may be in direct opposition, the topic may be one on which I have yet to formulate an opinion or have doubts about, an article may be posted solely with the intent to stimulate discussion or contemplation.


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlinezappaisgod
horrid asshole

Registered: 02/11/04
Posts: 81,741
Loc: Fractallife's gym
Last seen: 7 years, 7 months
Re: Bush: "We can win, no we can't, yes we can" [Re: Prosgeopax]
    #4547418 - 08/17/05 04:25 PM (18 years, 5 months ago)

Quote:

Prosgeopax said:
Quote:

zappaisgod said:
And this is where we will never see eye to eye.



That would require that you open your eyes.

OOOOOOH a snappy rejoinder. And one of your best I might add

Quote:

I think that they are exactly equivalent because there has been a perceived weakness and lack of resolution of the USA which has led each of these scumbags to think we will not act no matter how they fuck with us.



Huh? That makes about as much sense as beating up a paraplegic to demonstrate to members of the gang that attacked you before that you mean business.




Your failure to get the point does not indicate that there is no point. It just indicates that YOU are myopic. Your analogy is nonsensical. Perhaps that paraplegic was the Christopher Walken character in "Things To Do In Denver When You're Dead" Perhaps he ordered hits on your leader and friends and made overtures to the self same scum who trashed your house and shot your wife. Perhaps there are dots you can't connect because you don't want to and prefer to toe the moonbat party line like all the other Kosmonauts.


--------------------


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlinelonestar2004
Live to party,work to affordit.
 User Gallery

Registered: 10/03/04
Posts: 8,978
Loc: South Texas
Last seen: 12 years, 9 months
Re: Bush: "We can win, no we can't, yes we can" [Re: zappaisgod]
    #4547619 - 08/17/05 05:10 PM (18 years, 5 months ago)

here comes the.....

"Pubescent, Prepuberty, Prepubescent, Prepubertal, puertal Pupillarity"

response...


--------------------
America's debt problem is a "sign of leadership failure"

We have "reckless fiscal policies"

America has a debt problem and a failure of leadership.

Americans deserve better

Barack Obama


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleSwami
Eggshell Walker

Registered: 01/18/00
Posts: 15,413
Loc: In the hen house
Re: Bush: "We can win, no we can't, yes we can" [Re: Prosgeopax]
    #4547670 - 08/17/05 05:25 PM (18 years, 5 months ago)

Huh? That makes about as much sense as beating up a paraplegic to demonstrate to members of the gang that attacked you before that you mean business.

If the Pearl Harbor attack had come in 2004 instead of the '40s, Bush would likely have retaliated against Singapore.


--------------------



The proof is in the pudding.


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineProsgeopax
Jaded, yethopeful?

Registered: 01/28/05 Happy 19th Shroomiversary!
Posts: 1,258
Loc: Appearing at a mall near ...
Last seen: 18 years, 1 month
Re: Bush: "We can win, no we can't, yes we can" [Re: zappaisgod]
    #4547979 - 08/17/05 06:21 PM (18 years, 5 months ago)

Quote:

zappaisgod said:
Your failure to get the point does not indicate that there is no point.



I get your 'point,' it's just that it is lacking in any semblance of being arrived at by rational thought.

Quote:

It just indicates that YOU are myopic.



Actually, I had laser surgery to correct that condition.

Quote:

Your analogy is nonsensical.



Only if you lack the sense to understand.

Quote:


Perhaps he ordered hits on your leader and friends and made overtures to the self same scum who trashed your house and shot your wife.



Wait a minute, wait a minute, wait a minute. Are you a neocon automaton? Because that's right out of their robotics programming guide, you know, changing the rationalization in mid discussion when confronted with a good argument. Do you remember this?
Quote:

zappaisgod said:
Quote:

Prosgeopax said:
Quote:

lonestar2004 said:
I am sad for the 58 dead soldiers we lost last month.

and I am sad for the 3000 civilians we lost in one day.



What do 3000 civilians lost (I presume you mean 9/11) have to do with Iraq? These are two separate issues.




And this is where we will never see eye to eye. I think that they are exactly equivalent because there has been a perceived weakness and lack of resolution of the USA which has led each of these scumbags to think we will not act no matter how they fuck with us.


You see that? We went from discussing attacking Iraq as a response to 9/11 to a wholly different rationalization. Amazing!

Quote:

Perhaps there are dots you can't connect because you don't want to...



Please explain, citing FACTS AND SOURCES, what role Iraq played in the events of 9/11 and how many of the alleged hijackers were Iraqi. Because us RATIONAL folks aren't naive enough to buy into the simple minded propaganda. Attacking the country of a third rate dictator of a SECULAR REGIME who's military capabilities were SERIOUSLY DEGRADED from the first Gulf War to send a message because of 9/11 seems like the rationalization of a bunch of chickenhawks looking for a fight that they were 'sure' they could win, not a viable strategy to address Islamic terrorism.

I'm curious, when you are on recess do you beat up weaker kids that you previously beat up as a warning to others you can't find?

Quote:

...and prefer to toe the moonbat party line like all the other Kosmonauts.



What is 'the moonbat party line'? What do Russian astronauts have to do with this? I see that you still have not progressed past epithets when confronted with rational thought.


--------------------
Money doesn't grow on trees, but deficits do grow under Bushes.

You can accept, reject, or examine and test any new idea that comes to you. The wise man chooses the third way.
- Tom Willhite

Disclaimer: I reserve the right to change my opinions should I become aware of additional facts, the falsification of information or different perspectives. Articles written by others which I post may not necessarily reflect my opinions in part or in whole, my opinions may be in direct opposition, the topic may be one on which I have yet to formulate an opinion or have doubts about, an article may be posted solely with the intent to stimulate discussion or contemplation.


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlinezappaisgod
horrid asshole

Registered: 02/11/04
Posts: 81,741
Loc: Fractallife's gym
Last seen: 7 years, 7 months
Re: Bush: "We can win, no we can't, yes we can" [Re: Prosgeopax]
    #4548084 - 08/17/05 06:43 PM (18 years, 5 months ago)

Quote:

Prosgeopax said:
Quote:

zappaisgod said:
Your failure to get the point does not indicate that there is no point.



I get your 'point,' it's just that it is lacking in any semblance of being arrived at by rational thought.

So, smart guy, tell me what you think my point is

Quote:

It just indicates that YOU are myopic.



Actually, I had laser surgery to correct that condition.

Your myopia goes a good bit deeper than your eyes

Quote:

Your analogy is nonsensical.



Only if you lack the sense to understand.

yeah yeah yeah

Quote:


Perhaps he ordered hits on your leader and friends and made overtures to the self same scum who trashed your house and shot your wife.



Wait a minute, wait a minute, wait a minute. Are you a neocon automaton? Because that's right out of their robotics programming guide, you know, changing the rationalization in mid discussion when confronted with a good argument.

Yep you sure responded to that relevant point

Do you remember this?
Quote:

zappaisgod said:
Quote:

Prosgeopax said:
Quote:

lonestar2004 said:
I am sad for the 58 dead soldiers we lost last month.

and I am sad for the 3000 civilians we lost in one day.



What do 3000 civilians lost (I presume you mean 9/11) have to do with Iraq? These are two separate issues.




And this is where we will never see eye to eye. I think that they are exactly equivalent because there has been a perceived weakness and lack of resolution of the USA which has led each of these scumbags to think we will not act no matter how they fuck with us.


You see that? We went from discussing attacking Iraq as a response to 9/11 to a wholly different rationalization. Amazing!

Quote:

Perhaps there are dots you can't connect because you don't want to...




I highlighted the word equivalent for you. Your laser surgery seems not to have been entirely successful


Please explain, citing FACTS AND SOURCES, what role Iraq played in the events of 9/11 and how many of the alleged hijackers were Iraqi. Because us RATIONAL folks aren't naive enough to buy into the simple minded propaganda. Attacking the country of a third rate dictator of a SECULAR REGIME who's military capabilities were SERIOUSLY DEGRADED from the first Gulf War to send a message because of 9/11 seems like the rationalization of a bunch of chickenhawks looking for a fight that they were 'sure' they could win, not a viable strategy to address Islamic terrorism.

I never made the assertion you are imputing to me that Saddass was involved in 9/11. He was in violation of the terms of his surrender for over a decade. IN LIGHT OF 9/11 WE WILL NO LONGER ACCEPT THIS BEHAVIOUR INDEFINITELY. Get it yet.

I'm curious, when you are on recess do you beat up weaker kids that you previously beat up as a warning to others you can't find?

No I beat them up because it was fun. It was a stand alone pleasure

Quote:

...and prefer to toe the moonbat party line like all the other Kosmonauts.



What is 'the moonbat party line'? What do Russian astronauts have to do with this? I see that you still have not progressed past epithets when confronted with rational thought.




Tell me you have never heard of "moonbats" and don't know what the Daily Kos is


--------------------


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlinelonestar2004
Live to party,work to affordit.
 User Gallery

Registered: 10/03/04
Posts: 8,978
Loc: South Texas
Last seen: 12 years, 9 months
Re: Bush: "We can win, no we can't, yes we can" [Re: Prosgeopax]
    #4548647 - 08/17/05 08:25 PM (18 years, 5 months ago)

what does a Chickenhawk have to do with anything????


Chickenhawk
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.


Chickenhawk: formerly the name of two species of hawk known to prey on barnyard fowl - the Red-tailed Hawk and the Cooper's Hawk.

Chickenhawk: Gay slang for a man attracted to, or seeking, much younger men such as twinks.




chickenhawk - (North America & UK) a gay man who has a sexual preference for postpubescent young men (mid-teens to early-20s, generally)

http://www.answers.com/topic/list-of-sexual-slurs


--------------------
America's debt problem is a "sign of leadership failure"

We have "reckless fiscal policies"

America has a debt problem and a failure of leadership.

Americans deserve better

Barack Obama


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlinelonestar2004
Live to party,work to affordit.
 User Gallery

Registered: 10/03/04
Posts: 8,978
Loc: South Texas
Last seen: 12 years, 9 months
Re: Bush: "We can win, no we can't, yes we can" [Re: Swami]
    #4630709 - 09/07/05 04:20 PM (18 years, 4 months ago)

79% Say Success In Iraq is Important: 48% Say Success is Likely

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/2005/Perspectives%20on%20Iraq_August%2029.htm

Seventy-nine percent (79%) of Americans say that it is important for "Iraq to become a stable company that rejects terrorism."


Now who could that remaining 21% be...??????


--------------------
America's debt problem is a "sign of leadership failure"

We have "reckless fiscal policies"

America has a debt problem and a failure of leadership.

Americans deserve better

Barack Obama


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlinebeatnicknick
The Innovator
Male User Gallery

Registered: 05/25/05
Posts: 1,074
Last seen: 12 years, 8 months
Re: Bush: "We can win, no we can't, yes we can" [Re: Phred]
    #5923113 - 08/01/06 08:37 PM (17 years, 5 months ago)

Quote:

Phred said:
Quote:

I look forward to the day that Bush tells the American people that we've killed the world's last terrorist and that everything is safe again.




Do you look forward to that day as eagerly as you look forward to the day the Attorney General tells the American people we've imprisoned America's last rapist?



Phred




That's a bad comparison. There is no oversees war on rapists.


--------------------
I don't think for myself. I think as though I'm explaining my thoughts to someone else. I'm concerned only for those listening.


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineFrenchSocialist
DarwinianLeftist

Registered: 08/02/06
Posts: 883
Last seen: 16 years, 7 months
Re: Bush: "We can win, no we can't, yes we can" [Re: Phred]
    #5924293 - 08/02/06 02:48 AM (17 years, 5 months ago)

Quote:

Phred said:
Read what is actually written in the link you provided.

It doesn't describe weapons, it describes equipment with possible (and I stress "possible") use in military applications.


Note that "biological agents" refer to everything from nutrient media to reference cultures.




What you are talking about is dual-use technology. Dual-use techology is specifically controlled by the government's in most countries due to the fact that they have strong, and obvious military applications which can easily be fulfilled by another product.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dual-use_technology

So yeah this technology wasn't completely military in nature, it was dual-use. But that isn't the same as saying it is just technology with just "possible" military applications by a long-shot. There is a reason a specific type of technology is labled dual-use and not another kind that can regularly be imported/exported, and that reason usually involves the fact that the technology is the type to be generally or obviously used for military applications. The distinction between regular and dual-use technology is not made lightly but as a matter of legal process. Namely because a product labled "dual-use" is going to be blocked off during embargos or sanctions. The fact that the UN specifically blocked dual-use, instead of all medical technologies and food products to Iraq is a reason why the UN isn't culpable for the 400,000 Iraqi children who starved to death under these sanctions for example (saddam at any time could have imported a great deal of food/medical products which were not dual-use).

But I digress, like you have said it can go either way-- so lets look specifically at what was sold to Iraq in order to judge this specific case. I will just use example here to illustrate why I think these were no mere civilian commidities but weapons, including but not exclusive to bioweapons.

I will go specifically into the biological cultures here as you have yourself specifically made note of them via "Note that "biological agents" refer to everything from nutrient media to reference cultures." Sounds really harmless when you describe in such a vague and general way, but lets keep in mind that we are talking about
"anthrax, West Nile virus and botulism, as well as Brucella melitensis, which damages major organs, and Clostridium perfringens, which causes gas gangrene."

Biological cultures which were obviously intended for use in helping Iraq's biological weapons program. You can't honestly sell a fascist dictator samples of anthrax and pathogens which cause "gas gangrene" and not expect them to make biological weapons.


--------------------


"Both liberty and equality are among the primary goals pursued by human beings through many centuries; but total liberty for wolves is death to the lambs" -- Isaiah Berlin


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflinePhred
Fred's son
Male

Registered: 10/18/00
Posts: 12,949
Loc: Dominican Republic
Last seen: 9 years, 17 days
Re: Bush: "We can win, no we can't, yes we can" [Re: FrenchSocialist]
    #5925147 - 08/02/06 11:45 AM (17 years, 5 months ago)

From the link you so thoughtfully provided --

Quote:

In the early 1970s, Saddam Hussein ordered the creation of a clandestine nuclear weapons program.[2] Iraq’s Weapons of Mass Destruction programs were assisted by a wide variety of firms and governments in the 1970s and 1980s. [3][4][5][6][7] As part of Project 922, German firms such as Karl Kobe helped build Iraqi Chemical weapons facilities such as laboratories, bunkers, an administrative building, and first production buildings in the early 1980s under the cover of a pesticide plant. Other German firms sent 1,027 tons of precursors of Mustard gas, Sarin, Tabun, and tear gasses in all. This work allowed Iraq to produce 150 tons of mustard agent and 60 tons of Tabun in 1983 and 1984 respectively, continuing throughout the decade. Five other German firms supplied equipment to manfacture botulin toxin and mycotoxin for germ warfare. In 1988, German engineers presented centrifuge data that assisted Iraq expand its nuclear weapons program. Laboratory equipment and other information was provided, involving many German engineers. All told, 52% of Iraq's international chemical weapon equipment was of German origin. The State Establishment for Pesticide Production (SEPP) ordered culture media and incubators from Germany's Water Engineering Trading.[8]

France built Iraq’s Nuclear Osirak reactor in the late 1970s. Israel claimed that Iraq was getting close to building nuclear weapons, and so bombed it in 1981. Later, a French company built a turnkey factory which helped make nuclear fuel. France also provided glass-lined reactors, tanks, vessels, and columns used for the production of chemical weapons. Strains of dual use biological material also helped advance Iraq’s biological warfare program. Around 21% of Iraq’s international chemical weapon equipment was French.

Italy gave Iraq plutonium extraction facilities that advanced Iraq’s nuclear weapon program. 75,000 shells and rockets designed for chemical weapon use also came from Italy. Between 1979 and 1982 Italy gave depleted, natural, and low-enriched uranium. Swiss companies aided in Iraq’s nuclear weapons development in the form of specialized presses, milling machines, grinding machines, electrical discharge machines, and equipment for processing uranium to nuclear weapon grade. Brazil secretly aided the Iraqi nuclear weapon program by supplying natural uranium dioxide between 1981 and 1982 without notifying the IAEA. About 100 tons of Mustard gas also came from Brazil.

The United States exported $500 million of dual use exports to Iraq that were approved by the Commerce department.} Among them were advanced computers, some of which were used in Iraq’s nuclear program and bioweapons. Through the non-profit American Type Culture Collection and the Centers for Disease Control, the U.S. government under Ronald Reagan and George H.W. Bush sold or sent biological samples to Iraq under Saddam Hussein up until 1989. These materials included anthrax, West Nile virus and botulism, as well as Brucella melitensis, which damages major organs, and Clostridium perfringens, which causes gas gangrene. Some of these materials were used for Iraq's biological weapons research program, while others were used for vaccine development.[9]

The United Kingdom paid for a chlorine factory that was intended to be used for manufacturing mustard gas.[10] The government secretly gave the arms company Matrix Churchill permission to supply parts for the Iraqi supergun, precipitating the Arms-to-Iraq affair when it became known.
Many other countries contributed as well; since Iraq's nuclear program in the early 1980s was officially viewed internationally as for power production, not weapons, there were no UN prohibitions against it. An Austrian company gave Iraq calutrons for enriching uranium. The nation also provided heat exchangers, tanks, condensers, and columns for the Iraqi chemical weapons infrastructure, 16% of the international sales. Singapore gave 4,515 tons of precursors for VX, sarin, tabun, and mustard gasses to Iraq. The Dutch gave 4,261 tons of precursors for sarin, tabun, mustard, and tear gasses to Iraq. Egypt gave 2,400 tons of tabun and sarin precursors to Iraq and 28,500 tons of weapons designed for carrying chemical munitions. India gave 2,343 tons of precursors to VX, tabun, Sarin, and mustard gasses. Luxembourg gave Iraq 650 tons of mustard gas precursors. Spain gave Iraq 57,500 munitions designed for carrying chemical weapons. In addition, they provided reactors, condensers, columns and tanks for Iraq’s chemical warfare program, 4.4% of the international sales. China provided 45,000 munitions designed for chemical warfare. Portugal provided yellowcake between 1980 and 1982. Niger provided yellowcake in 1981.[11]





Your link confirms what I (and others) had already pointed out in numerous past threads on this topic -- the contribution of materials by the United States is a drop in the bucket compared to what other nations were providing. Some computers (which can be and are used for just about anything) and some biological cultures, some of which were used for vaccine development. Of the agents listed -- anthrax, West Nile virus, botulinis, Brucella melitensis, and Clostridium perfringens -- none are even remotely exotic (except perhaps at that time West Nile virus) and none of them even the least bit difficult to obtain. Hell, anthrax and brucella are available from any veterinary college in the world, while botulinis and clostridium are as common as dirt. Botulism is a major cause of food poisoning and is dead simple to culture. And no, gas gangrene is not suitable as a biological weapon since it is not contagious and can develop only in wounds. Clostridium perfringens is an anaerobic bacterium.

So what's the scorecard? Of all the countries listed in the article you linked, the US has the lowest -- by far -- contribution to Iraq of items which could be designated "dual-use".

Compare this to countries such as Brazil, which the article states gave Iraq not just precursors to mustard gas, but actual mustard gas itself -- 100 tons of it.

And of course Germany and France, who to all intents and purposes provided entire factories for nuke and chemical production. Remind me again the position of France and Germany in the UNSC debates discussing the resumption of hostilities in Iraq? Why, as I recall, they were against it. Probably just a coincidence.





Phred


--------------------


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineFrenchSocialist
DarwinianLeftist

Registered: 08/02/06
Posts: 883
Last seen: 16 years, 7 months
Re: Bush: "We can win, no we can't, yes we can" [Re: Phred]
    #5926172 - 08/02/06 05:35 PM (17 years, 5 months ago)

Quote:

Collection and the Centers for Disease Control, the U.S. government under Ronald Reagan and George H.W. Bush sold or sent biological samples to Iraq under Saddam Hussein up until 1989. These materials included anthrax, West Nile virus and botulism, as well as Brucella melitensis, which damages major organs, and Clostridium perfringens, which causes gas gangrene. Some of these materials were used for Iraq's biological weapons research program, while others were used for vaccine development.[9]




So the US did sell weapons to Iraq that were used in Saddam's research program to make WMDs. Whether you think we gave them more or less support then other countries is besides the point--two wrongs don't make a right.

And furthermore lets keep in mind who we were selling to exactly: the Iraqi Ministry of Defense:

Quote:

Although official U.S. policy still barred the export of U.S. military equipment to Iraq, some was evidently provided on a "don't ask - don't tell" basis. In April 1984, the Baghdad interests section asked to be kept apprised of Bell Helicopter Textron's negotiations to sell helicopters to Iraq, which were not to be "in any way configured for military use" [Document 55]. The purchaser was the Iraqi Ministry of Defense. In December 1982, Bell Textron's Italian subsidiary had informed the U.S. embassy in Rome that it turned down a request from Iraq to militarize recently purchased Hughes helicopters. An allied government, South Korea, informed the State Department that it had received a similar request in June 1983 (when a congressional aide asked in March 1983 whether heavy trucks recently sold to Iraq were intended for military purposes, a State Department official replied "we presumed that this was Iraq's intention, and had not asked.") [Document 44]




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

Selling dual-use equipment essentially to the Iraqi Army is a clear indication that these items were intended for military use.


--------------------


"Both liberty and equality are among the primary goals pursued by human beings through many centuries; but total liberty for wolves is death to the lambs" -- Isaiah Berlin


Edited by FrenchSocialist (08/02/06 05:47 PM)


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflinePhred
Fred's son
Male

Registered: 10/18/00
Posts: 12,949
Loc: Dominican Republic
Last seen: 9 years, 17 days
Re: Bush: "We can win, no we can't, yes we can" [Re: FrenchSocialist]
    #5926321 - 08/02/06 06:21 PM (17 years, 5 months ago)

Quote:

So the US did sell weapons to Iraq that were used in Saddam's research program to make WMDs.




Incorrect. Are you incapable of reading your own links? The US sold computers. Computers are not weapons. And the US sold cultures of commonly available bacteria. Commonly available bacteria are not weapons.

As for your pious "two wrongs don't make a right" bullshit, compare what was actually sold by the other countries mentioned to what was sold by the US. Not even close to the same thing.

Quote:

And furthermore lets keep in mind who we were selling to exactly: the Iraqi Ministry of Defense:




Are you incapable of reading your own links? What part of "In April 1984, the Baghdad interests section asked to be kept apprised of Bell Helicopter Textron's negotiations to sell helicopters to Iraq, which were not to be "in any way configured for military use" " is unclear to you? Are you saying Bell sold helicopters configured for military use to Iraq? Link, please.

What part of "In December 1982, Bell Textron's Italian subsidiary had informed the U.S. embassy in Rome that it turned down a request from Iraq to militarize recently purchased Hughes helicopters," are you having difficulty comprehending?

Anyway, what's this new interest in trucks and helicopters? Are you now trying to claim that trucks and helicopters are WMDs?





Phred


--------------------


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineFrenchSocialist
DarwinianLeftist

Registered: 08/02/06
Posts: 883
Last seen: 16 years, 7 months
Re: Bush: "We can win, no we can't, yes we can" [Re: Phred]
    #5927498 - 08/03/06 12:17 AM (17 years, 5 months ago)

Quote:

The US sold computers. Computers are not weapons. And the US sold cultures of commonly available bacteria. Commonly available bacteria are not weapons.




1- We sold more to Iraq then computers. We sold military vehicles. We sold viruses. We sold this to the Iraq Ministry of Defense. And the computer equipment we did sell was dual-use. This is an open and shut case.

2- You say these biological samples are both commonly available and not weapons but where's your proof? These devices were not only possibly used to make biological weapons, they were used in helping Saddam make biological weapons according to the wiki article I presented (with the key section written in bold in my previous post).

3- The part where you talk about US military vehicles being sold to Iraq:

Phred: "What part of "In April 1984, the Baghdad interests section asked to be kept apprised of Bell Helicopter Textron's negotiations to sell helicopters to Iraq, which were not to be "in any way configured for military use" " is unclear to you?"

Is taken out of context. The whole quote is:

Quote:

Although official U.S. policy still barred the export of U.S. military equipment to Iraq, some was evidently provided on a "don't ask - don't tell" basis. In April 1984, the Baghdad interests section asked to be kept apprised of Bell Helicopter Textron's negotiations to sell helicopters to Iraq, which were not to be "in any way configured for military use" [Document 55]. The purchaser was the Iraqi Ministry of Defense. In December 1982, Bell Textron's Italian subsidiary had informed the U.S. embassy in Rome that it turned down a request from Iraq to militarize recently purchased Hughes helicopters. An allied government, South Korea, informed the State Department that it had received a similar request in June 1983 (when a congressional aide asked in March 1983 whether heavy trucks recently sold to Iraq were intended for military purposes, a State Department official replied "we presumed that this was Iraq's intention, and had not asked.") [Document 44]




In other words there were repeated attempts by Saddam to further militarize what dual-use devices were sold to him before the US sold the same kinds of devices to Iraq, the State Department knew about this, and the State Department didn't care because that is what was intended.


In any event, you seem to be missing the point. The point is, even if the US sold less weaponry to Saddam then other nations- so what? The fact is we can hardly complain years later about Saddam having WMDs after we sold him anthrax that was used in his biological weapons program. And the fact is dual-use technology is hardly just technology with a mere possibility for military use like you say it is. Like I said, these devices are specifically chosen as a matter of legal process after several considerations. If you want to continue exaggerating how broad the standards are for labeling a device as dual-use, that's fine, but you could at least be polite enough to forward some evidence with your bold claim.


--------------------


"Both liberty and equality are among the primary goals pursued by human beings through many centuries; but total liberty for wolves is death to the lambs" -- Isaiah Berlin


Edited by FrenchSocialist (08/03/06 12:44 AM)


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflinePhred
Fred's son
Male

Registered: 10/18/00
Posts: 12,949
Loc: Dominican Republic
Last seen: 9 years, 17 days
Re: Bush: "We can win, no we can't, yes we can" [Re: FrenchSocialist]
    #5927801 - 08/03/06 04:22 AM (17 years, 5 months ago)

Quote:

1- We sold more to Iraq then computers. We sold military vehicles.




Source, please. US companies sold non-military helicopters -- helicopters the company refused to militarize for Iraq, according to the link you provided -- and US companies sold trucks. Would you care to explain to the audience how selling trucks is bad? What is the difference between a truck and a "militarized" truck, anyway? The color of the paint?

Quote:

We sold viruses. We sold this to the Iraq Ministry of Defense.




Would you please provide us a link from a credible source showing the viruses were sold to the Iraq Ministry of Defense?

Quote:

And the computer equipment we did sell was dual-use.




Computers are multi-use, not dual use. A computer will do whatever you program it to. If you want to provide a link from a credible source showing US companies sold Iraq computer programs designed to .... oh, I don't know... control milling machines used to shape plutonium or uranium slugs for use in fission bombs, you might have a case.

Quote:

This is an open and shut case.




An open and shut case of your reading into data what isn't there.

Quote:

2- You say these biological samples are both commonly available and not weapons but where's your proof?




My knowledge of what one can get from veterinary colleges. An acquaintance of mine is a veterinarian specializing in livestock care. Anthrax and brucella are not particularly rare afflictions of livestock. Anywhere there are enough sheep a livestock vet will come across cases of anthrax. Anywhere there are enough cows you will run across brucella. As for clostridium and botulinus, neither are uncommon in soil samples. There are cases of botulism poisoning somewhere in the world every week -- possibly every day if you look hard enough. None of these organisms (with the exception of West Nile virus) are considered rare. They are common as dirt. I'll tell you what is considered rare -- smallpox. What is your take on the outbreak of smallpox in Iraq mentioned in the article you linked?

Quote:

In other words there were repeated attempts by Saddam to further militarize what dual-use devices were sold to him before the US sold the same kinds of devices to Iraq, the State Department knew about this, and the State Department didn't care because that is what was intended.




What do you mean by "before the US sold the same kinds of devices to Iraq"? US companies sold Iraq non-military helicopters and non-military heavy trucks. The company which sold Iraq the non-military helicopters refused to assist in militarizing those helicopters, and the companies which sold Iraq the heavy trucks were apparently not even asked to assist Iraq in militarizing those heavy trucks, South Korea was asked. By the way, just what is involved in "militarizing" a heavy truck other than painting it a different color?

Besides, you will note all these purchases of trucks and helicopters took place in the early Eighties. What reason would a US company have in 1982 for not selling trucks and helicopters to Iraq? Or to Afghanistan or Egypt or Saudi Arabia or Turkey, for that matter?

And of course, helicopters and trucks are not WMDs.

Quote:

In any event, you seem to be missing the point. The point is, even if the US sold less weaponry to Saddam then other nations- so what? The fact is we can hardly complain years later about Saddam having WMDs after we sold him anthrax that was used in his biological weapons program.




It is you who miss the point. It was the conditional ceasefire agreement signed by Iraq in 1991 which required verification of the proof of destruction of Iraq's chemical and bio weaponry. That ceasefire didn't exist in 1982. Or in 1983 or in 1984.

Quote:

And the fact is dual-use technology is hardly just technology with a mere possibility for military use like you say it is.




Sorry, but when it comes to computers, helicopters, and biological cultures, yes it is. How many countries in the world have anthrax cultures somewhere? Almost all of them do. How many have trucks? How many have computers? Hell, clothes can as easily be considered "dual-use" as trucks -- what are uniforms if not clothes? What about canteens? Backpacks? Boots? Are these things not also "dual use"? What about cameras? Radios?

You smugly trot out a VERY short list of stuff sold to Iraq by the US (compared to every other country mentioned in the link you provide) as if it is something for which the US should be condemned. If a truly objective observer were to look at that list, I guarantee you the US would be the last country he'd focus on.

Quote:

Like I said, these devices are specifically chosen as a matter of legal process after several considerations.




What the hell does that mean? Iraq needed computers. The US made the best computers in the world. Nothing to consider -- buy a US computer. Same with trucks and helicopters. Same with pathogens -- it is no secret the reference tissue collection at CDC is the standard by which all others are meaured. Anthrax and brucella are common afflictions of livestock, botulism food poisoning is a worldwide phenomenon, gas gangrene is a problem every hospital in the world has to deal with occasionally. If the US were to refuse to provide -- in the early Eighties, remember -- assistance to a Middle Eastern country in dealing with these common health problems, can you imagine the cries of condemnation? Typical NYT headline would be -- "US to Arab countries -- your diseases not our problem."




Phred


--------------------


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

Shop: Kraken Kratom Kratom Capsules for Sale   Unfolding Nature Unfolding Nature: Being in the Implicate Order   Left Coast Kratom Buy Kratom Extract   North Spore Cultivation Supplies   Original Sensible Seeds Autoflowering Cannabis Seeds   Bridgetown Botanicals Bridgetown Botanicals   PhytoExtractum Buy Bali Kratom Powder


Similar ThreadsPosterViewsRepliesLast post
* "Bush Knew........An American Requiem" (Flash animation)
( 1 2 3 4 5 all )
LearyfanS 6,315 96 09/12/03 07:02 PM
by afoaf
* Bush haters examined.
( 1 2 all )
luvdemshrooms 2,733 22 09/22/03 09:51 PM
by silversoul7
* Bush torturing almost 1,000,000 Americans
( 1 2 3 4 all )
Swami 7,112 77 12/18/03 10:29 AM
by medicinebag
* Bush Plans $1.5 Billion Drive for Marriage, no gays
( 1 2 3 all )
daussaulit 5,901 41 01/23/04 12:21 PM
by Azmodeus
* What if the next Bush is worse?
( 1 2 all )
MushyMay 1,163 22 02/14/03 05:07 AM
by angryshroom
* G.W. Bush
( 1 2 all )
Yarry 3,218 25 02/02/04 06:37 AM
by Phred
* Corzine speaks on the Bush tax cuts. luvdemshrooms 597 3 10/30/03 02:00 PM
by Phred
* Why would someone like George W. Bush
( 1 2 3 4 all )
LearyfanS 4,026 65 04/29/03 04:24 PM
by GreenGuys420

Extra information
You cannot start new topics / You cannot reply to topics
HTML is disabled / BBCode is enabled
Moderator: Enlil, ballsalsa
4,442 topic views. 1 members, 4 guests and 4 web crawlers are browsing this forum.
[ Show Images Only | Sort by Score | Print Topic ]
Search this thread:

Copyright 1997-2024 Mind Media. Some rights reserved.

Generated in 0.052 seconds spending 0.009 seconds on 14 queries.