it was in reference to your query concerning whether or not there were any other attack between 93 and 01, alright fine!! I'll look them up, just wish I wasn't so drunk, getting hard to read, insomnia+alcohol can have unpredictable results........shit I don't think I ever sobered up from Thursday night, first time I roller skated in 11 years, still sore, one thing about having a bunch of gay friends, they party like hell
Don't bother, I've found an attack just this year
I would also argue that the London bombings demonstrate a failure by the American government, but that's highly debatable.
My common on the your argument is that to use a legal definition of the land as US soil is silly, the rest of the country is still not controlled, so defending it is nigh impossible.
EDIT: Also, 2004 attack here
I would also argue that the London bombings demonstrate a failure by the American government, but that's highly debatable.
My common on the your argument is that to use a legal definition of the land as US soil is silly, the rest of the country is still not controlled, so defending it is nigh impossible.
EDIT: Also, 2004 attack here
Last edited by Bubbalo (2006-07-01 21:29:32)
I think the london and spanish bombings were more a matter of internal policing, it would have required international chatter for another country to get involved, I personally consider them both attacks against the US, as I would an attack on any of our allies, Canada, Aus+NZ, France even, family's gotta stick together
Regardless of where the attacks originated, they are evidence the terrorist activities have not been slowed.
all of your disecting and I will respond to 1.......Tell me what I have said at anytime, that leads you to the conclusion that I am for huge govt. control........big govt. is a leftist view not a view from the right...sorry. You are going to have to try and figure out a different, evil word, to discribe my views cuz totalitarionism ain't describin' my views at all.Bubbalo wrote:
The part where Paula Jones waited till he was President to go to court, for one.Horseman 77 wrote:
Thats three steps you had to follow, Tell us where you got lost?You're trying to tell me that you think the US intelligence community honestly believed that Iraq had WMDs?lowing wrote:
he didn't lie to us, as a matter of fact he said the gloves were coming off over this bullshit and so far not another attack has been successful on our soilFun fact: Al Qaeda's plans list them as currently in a recruitment drive. In this sense, Iraq plays right into their hands.lowing wrote:
so far not another attack has been successful on our soil
Besides which, were there any attacks on US soil between 1993 and 2001? I'm not aware of any.No, absolutely nothing. I mean, freedom was really just a footnote in the creation of America anyway.lowing wrote:
is there something else that matters other than that??And people like you are the best allies that totalitarians have anywhere.lowing wrote:
People like you are the best allies the terrorist have in our country.Nope, guess again.lowing wrote:
Oh I am sure him and a few choice others are subscribers at the least.
Tell me where I have said I am in support of terrorism?
A simple conclusion drawn from your lack of support on fighting it. and your views on those that ARE fighting it.Bubbalo wrote:
Tell me where I have said I am in support of terrorism?
No, I don't support the current methods. I could argue that your lack of support for those who oppose laws which restricts civil liberties demonstrates your support for totalitarianism, yet I do not.
I have never supported laws that restricted civil liberties........name some that I support.Bubbalo wrote:
No, I don't support the current methods. I could argue that your lack of support for those who oppose laws which restricts civil liberties demonstrates your support for totalitarianism, yet I do not.
Name some terrorists that I support. You attempt to use a double standard; my lack of support for your side implies support for you opposition, your lack of support for my side does not imply support for my opposition.
NOOOO Bubbalo you said.."I could argue that your lack of support for those who oppose laws which restricts civil liberties demonstrates your support for totalitarianism". sooooooooo go ahead and make your argument. show me what I have said in my views that supports your argument and stop the this bullshit merry go round. You argue just like a fuckin' woman. Your attempts to answer questions with questions, and your mastery of the reversal is growing into legendary status.Bubbalo wrote:
Name some terrorists that I support. You attempt to use a double standard; my lack of support for your side implies support for you opposition, your lack of support for my side does not imply support for my opposition.
You argued that my lack of support for the American military in Iraq demonstrated my support for terrorists, I simply apply the same logic to you.
As for this:
I only ask of you what you ask of me. How is that unfair?
As for this:
I find it interesting that your incredible wisdom shows you that there is a certain type of arguing attributable to either gender.lowing wrote:
You argue just like a fuckin' woman.
I only ask of you what you ask of me. How is that unfair?
LMAO OK hear ya go then I will use alittle Bubbalo debate tactic to respond to your first sentence: Ohhhhhhh so you are saying that YOU DO support the American military in Iraq.Bubbalo wrote:
You argued that my lack of support for the American military in Iraq demonstrated my support for terrorists, I simply apply the same logic to you.
As for this:I find it interesting that your incredible wisdom shows you that there is a certain type of arguing attributable to either gender.lowing wrote:
You argue just like a fuckin' woman.
I only ask of you what you ask of me. How is that unfair?
Now for my real response
Your comments have lead me to believe that you think the terrorist are victims against the fascist war mongering Americans, and that they are only protecting themselves. America is only there for oil and we used WMD's as an excuse to take over the world. I think we ALL feel that this is your opinion,since you have said as much in various threads and posts..
Now, if this opinion is some how NOT supporting terrorist, then you need to clarify.
There ya go, for the second time I explained why I feel like you are sympathetic toward the terrorist efforts. Now kindly dream up a reason why or how I have lead you to believe that I support totalitarianism AND how I support laws that take away our citizens civil liberties.
As far as the argue like a woman comment, when you get married, you will give me + 1 karma for ohhhhhh sooooooo right.
Dont impeach him!! Just cover him up with his precious oil, stick a pole between his legs and let him light his way to hell
For those of you who voted no: Preemptive wars is no biggie... the only reason to impeach a president is if he plants some bugs on other members of the government or if his secretary blows him right?
For those of you who voted no: Preemptive wars is no biggie... the only reason to impeach a president is if he plants some bugs on other members of the government or if his secretary blows him right?
ƒ³
When have I ever characerised the US as fascist, or terrorists as victims?
you should
ƒ³
holy fuck bubbalo...the question should be................WHEN HAVEN'T YOU??Bubbalo wrote:
When have I ever characerised the US as fascist, or terrorists as victims?
I am done with your ass bubbalo. and ya know what? you are worse than a woman......At least a woman will stand by her own irrational positions when confronted with them.
So, we can now definitively call you sexist........
Seriously though, I challenge you to find one example where I characterise the US as fascist or terrorists (of the sort we are discussing) as victims.
And what is it with you Conservatives being fascinated with my ass? First Horseman and now you..........
Edit: To clarify: I have cast the US in a negative light, but never called it fascist. I have cast some terrorists in a light which is less negative than others, but never, to my knowledge, called them victims.
Seriously though, I challenge you to find one example where I characterise the US as fascist or terrorists (of the sort we are discussing) as victims.
And what is it with you Conservatives being fascinated with my ass? First Horseman and now you..........
Edit: To clarify: I have cast the US in a negative light, but never called it fascist. I have cast some terrorists in a light which is less negative than others, but never, to my knowledge, called them victims.
Last edited by Bubbalo (2006-07-02 07:34:43)
Here is your advice to me when I asked you the same qeustion...Bubbalo wrote:
Horseman: Could you please link to where I said that so I can read the whole post including the leadup?
As to the other quote, I'm sorry I missed it. It happens. I still find it highly suspicious that she didn't come forward earlier.
I led you through the process step by step and you missed it again. Can you? do you read ?
If you fail to tell me where I've said this, which I feel is a highly reasonable request, I will ask for moderator intervention on the grounds that you are harassing me.
" use search " and read page by page like I had to to find every single post where you started with your unwanted insults. Only to have you say
" I never said I didn't insult you first " when I did find every single one of them.
Get a mod. thats the intellectual equivalent of calling your mommy so it figures you'd pull it.
wussy.
for some one who acuses others of being slow on the uptake you are in a class by yourself.
I feel like I am trying to define voltage to a aboriganal tribesman.
one more time.
Horseman 77 wrote:
1. Paula Jones was suing him for deformation of character.
2. Lewinsky was called as a Witness. He tried to get her to change her story.
3. Then he lied about it under oath.
Thats three steps you had to follow, Tell us where you got lost?
Basically clinton said during his campaign to be president in 1991 " I never cheated on hillary "Bubbalo wrote:
The part where Paula Jones waited till he was President to go to court, for one.
Some one knew he dated Paula Jones and asked her about it, she said " Yes I went out with him. "
He said " If you drag a $100 dollar bill thru a trailer park you are bound to get some one to say anything. "
She said " You are a lair and now you must publicly apologize "
Do you get it now, or are you deliberately pretending to be an insipid, immature, ostentatious, little child in some misguided effort to create repetitive, circular arguments in every single thread?
Last edited by Horseman 77 (2006-07-04 09:04:57)
That is why I said your comments lead me to believe the way I mentioned.I also challenged you to clarify your position of which you have yet to do.Bubbalo wrote:
So, we can now definitively call you sexist........
Seriously though, I challenge you to find one example where I characterise the US as fascist or terrorists (of the sort we are discussing) as victims.
And what is it with you Conservatives being fascinated with my ass? First Horseman and now you..........
Edit: To clarify: I have cast the US in a negative light, but never called it fascist. I have cast some terrorists in a light which is less negative than others, but never, to my knowledge, called them victims.
The war in Afganistan was about terrorism. The war in Iraq was about finding and eliminating WMD's. Now, the war in Iraq is about terrorism. Now explain why ppl like me are terrorists best allies.lowing wrote:
jesus christ get over it already........he didn't lie to us, as a matter of fact he said the gloves were coming off over this bullshit and so far not another attack has been successful on our soil........is there something else that matters other than that??rawls wrote:
Too bad lying to the American public and the world is not.lowing wrote:
actually, lying to a grand jury is quite illegal.
I said it before and I will say it again.......People like you are the best allies the terrorist have in our country.
you refuse to recognize the war in Iraq was started 15 years ago and lasted until Iraq signed a peace treaty to cease hostilities that they ignore and broke all through the 90's. the hostilities commenced when we decided that Iraq had plenty of time to comply with the resolutions and action needed to be taken. The war isn't about WMD's any more than WW2 was about concentration camps. It is a small part of a huge picture that you take the luxury to piece meal out and select only those topics that suit your purposes.rawls wrote:
The war in Afganistan was about terrorism. The war in Iraq was about finding and eliminating WMD's. Now, the war in Iraq is about terrorism. Now explain why ppl like me are terrorists best allies.lowing wrote:
jesus christ get over it already........he didn't lie to us, as a matter of fact he said the gloves were coming off over this bullshit and so far not another attack has been successful on our soil........is there something else that matters other than that??rawls wrote:
Too bad lying to the American public and the world is not.
I said it before and I will say it again.......People like you are the best allies the terrorist have in our country.
By you attacking the president and this war on terror, I can only assume you would rather let the terrorist have their way, which also means you side with them. you can not be against this war against this president against the way this country is fighting and NOT side with the terrorist. Jane Fonda tried it, and she still is hounded about her anti-American rhetoric from 40 years ago.............You can't have it both ways....You gunna fight, or watch and criticize? Believe me, the latter, the terrorist love to see, that is way I call you their ally.
Okay lowing, time to come off the fence. Do you want to fuck Richard Simmons, or Tom Cruise? Don't tell me you don't want to fuck Tom Cruise, because that's just the kind of thing Richard Simmons loves to hear, believe me. You either want to fuck Tom Cruise or Richard Simmons, so which is it?
Am I the only one who finds it ironic that a video of some poor guy getting beheaded is somehow considered good propaganda by BOTH SIDES? Who are the terrorists' real allies?
Am I the only one who finds it ironic that a video of some poor guy getting beheaded is somehow considered good propaganda by BOTH SIDES? Who are the terrorists' real allies?
I will bet you are the only one who knows what the hell you are talking about.spastic bullet wrote:
Okay lowing, time to come off the fence. Do you want to fuck Richard Simmons, or Tom Cruise? Don't tell me you don't want to fuck Tom Cruise, because that's just the kind of thing Richard Simmons loves to hear, believe me. You either want to fuck Tom Cruise or Richard Simmons, so which is it?
Am I the only one who finds it ironic that a video of some poor guy getting beheaded is somehow considered good propaganda by BOTH SIDES? Who are the terrorists' real allies?
My stance isn't to say that that video is propaganda...It is the realities of who we are up against. It isn't some made up monster that we invented to get support.