Pages: 1 … 5 6 7

 

2006-09-01 20:59:34
lowing
Banned
+1,662|6913|USA

UnOriginalNuttah wrote:

lowing wrote:

Well you are now saying the most one of the most generous countries in the history of the world is committing genocide...Play it safe, keep it as an opinion.
I'm not, plenty of people are though.  And if you are going to post links to websites with adverts like this:
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/adbanners/ … 25x200.gif

Then I feel no remorse in responding with obviously biased sources too:

http://www.countercurrents.org/iraq-polya110305.htm
http://www.aljazeerah.info/Opinion%20ed … 0Polya.htm
http://usa.mediamonitors.net/content/view/full/17012

http://news.sulekha.com/newsanalysisdisplay.aspx?cid=41395 wrote:

AN HORRENDOUS EXAMPLE OF UK-US PC RACISM is provided by Anglo-American mainstream media NON-REPORTAGE of the horrendous post-invasion under-5 infant mortality in  Coalition-occupied Iraq and Afghanistan (1.7 million) that is occurring through non-provision by the Anglo-American conquerors of life-sustaining requisites in gross violation of the Geneva Conventions i.e. PASSIVE GENOCIDE [see (6)].
Now, let's just ask a theoretical:  Are the protections offered by the Human Rights acts and Geneva Conventions applicable to these people, or not?

lowing wrote:

Is this why the UN was formed??  ID=4200 http://www.time.com/time/magazine/artic … 37,00.html http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/artic … E_ID=42088  http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/P … 2bqwjn.asp
No, that's why it needs to be reformed.  When selfish individuals (e.g. the rapists and abusers) and states (e.g. Iraq, Israel, Lebanon, etc.) subvert and abuse the system for their own benefit then they should be brought to account and punished in international court, and questions should be asked as to how this can be prevented.  But the lessons of WWII should never be forget, and neither should the reason why the UN was formed.  My only hope is that it doesn't take another war on the scale of WWII to remind the world what the peacekeeping organisation is there for, and that everyone can see the benefit and work towards cooperation without slipping into the trap of excessive globalisation and violation of soveign rights.

lowing wrote:

No, liberals want control of business to force them to pay even more taxes than they already do so their ever needy social programs can be paid for. Since the policy is take from those that earn it and give to those that don't.
Since the conservatives are in power in America you are never going to get your way more than you are already.  And in fact, there will be an inevitable trend towards the left as demonstrated by history.  I wish I could see your face when that result comes in, but I'll just take comfort from the fact that if you hate the left when they aren't the dominant force in the Whitehouse, your life will be hell when they are. 

lowing wrote:

Also it is the liberal mentality that prevails with all the bullshit frivolous lawsuits that tie up our courts costing us billions.
Hmmmmmmm, not to sure where you get that one.  Maybe you mean 'those bullshit frivolous lawsuits that tie up out courts costing [us conservatives and big businesses] billions in buying our way out of accountability for gross negligence, exploitation, violation of local laws and generally shitty behaviour'.  Yeah, that must be it.
Do me a favor, if you agree with me then stop posting what others would disagree with me on, let them do it. Why the hell would I want to debate you over something we both apparently agree on??

I wish you would fight for the rights of the people who lost their lives in terror attacks as much as you fight for the rights of the people who took them or supported taking them or financed taking them. Wouldn't that be sight??

Might wanna re-read. The very organization that you say WE NEED, is the ones you are describing that you say need controlled.

Gunna be a disappointment for ya, I worked all the way through the Clinton years and never missed a beat. So I am afraid the event you wish you could see is going to be pretty anti-climatic for ya.sorry.


LOL yeah, gross negligence like sueing a major fast food company for a finger in the chilli?? Any guesses on who SHE voted for last election??  Truth is you and I could go round and round on this point and I just don't have it in me.
2006-09-02 00:18:35
JimmyBotswana
Member
+82|6848|Montreal

lowing wrote:

LOL yeah, gross negligence like sueing a major fast food company for a finger in the chilli??
Wait. So you aren't entitled to sue a restaurant if they give you food with a severed finger in it?
2006-09-02 00:20:12
JimmyBotswana
Member
+82|6848|Montreal
lowing = EVERYTHING WRONG WITH THE WORLD IS BECAUSE OF LIBERALS.

I wish I could have such a simple mind like you lowing things would be so much easier if I could just scapegoat everything onto one group of people.
2006-09-02 05:47:38
lowing
Banned
+1,662|6913|USA

JimmyBotswana wrote:

lowing wrote:

LOL yeah, gross negligence like sueing a major fast food company for a finger in the chilli??
Wait. So you aren't entitled to sue a restaurant if they give you food with a severed finger in it?
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/7425950/ read up do more googles on this you will find it.
2006-09-02 05:52:49
lowing
Banned
+1,662|6913|USA

JimmyBotswana wrote:

lowing = EVERYTHING WRONG WITH THE WORLD IS BECAUSE OF LIBERALS.

I wish I could have such a simple mind like you lowing things would be so much easier if I could just scapegoat everything onto one group of people.
No not just liberals, also the islamic terrorists who have liberal support.

Yeah, it is pretty convenient I consider myself lucky. Liberals have all the work of inventing conspiracy theories to try and prove a position and tap dancing around issues. Defending the actions of the under achievers in society takes it toll on you as well I bet.


Always remember, VOTE DEMOCRAT, IT IS EASIER THAN GETTING A JOB!!
2006-09-02 06:40:54
psychotoxic187
Member
+11|6971

lowing wrote:

JimmyBotswana wrote:

lowing = EVERYTHING WRONG WITH THE WORLD IS BECAUSE OF LIBERALS.

I wish I could have such a simple mind like you lowing things would be so much easier if I could just scapegoat everything onto one group of people.
No not just liberals, also the islamic terrorists who have liberal support.

Yeah, it is pretty convenient I consider myself lucky. Liberals have all the work of inventing conspiracy theories to try and prove a position and tap dancing around issues. Defending the actions of the under achievers in society takes it toll on you as well I bet.


Always remember, VOTE DEMOCRAT, IT IS EASIER THAN GETTING A JOB!!
Or, vote democratic, millions on welfare depend on you.
2006-09-03 12:39:12
JimmyBotswana
Member
+82|6848|Montreal

lowing wrote:

No not just liberals, also the islamic terrorists who have liberal support.
Care to back that up with some proof, or is it just hyperbole like everything else you say?
2006-09-03 19:08:15
lowing
Banned
+1,662|6913|USA

JimmyBotswana wrote:

lowing wrote:

No not just liberals, also the islamic terrorists who have liberal support.
Care to back that up with some proof, or is it just hyperbole like everything else you say?
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/co … 50_pf.html



http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/2145810.stm

my favorite part  " The New York Times published a copy of the alleged US contingency proposal - giving details of a massive assault by land, sea and air - in its 5 July issue, after receiving a copy of the plan. "


that enough or ya want more??
2006-09-03 21:36:59
JimmyBotswana
Member
+82|6848|Montreal

lowing wrote:

JimmyBotswana wrote:

lowing wrote:

No not just liberals, also the islamic terrorists who have liberal support.
Care to back that up with some proof, or is it just hyperbole like everything else you say?
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/co … 50_pf.html



http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/2145810.stm

my favorite part  " The New York Times published a copy of the alleged US contingency proposal - giving details of a massive assault by land, sea and air - in its 5 July issue, after receiving a copy of the plan. "


that enough or ya want more??
Seeing as how none of this is proof, yes I want more.
2006-09-03 21:48:21
lowing
Banned
+1,662|6913|USA

JimmyBotswana wrote:

lowing wrote:

JimmyBotswana wrote:


Care to back that up with some proof, or is it just hyperbole like everything else you say?
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/co … 50_pf.html



http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/2145810.stm

my favorite part  " The New York Times published a copy of the alleged US contingency proposal - giving details of a massive assault by land, sea and air - in its 5 July issue, after receiving a copy of the plan. "


that enough or ya want more??
Seeing as how none of this is proof, yes I want more.
Well gee whiz Jimmy, if you don't think a liberal newspaper printing the US war plans for Iraq as helping the terrorists, IE supporting them. Then you are going to have to let me know exactly what your standard of proof is..
2006-09-04 05:54:04
JimmyBotswana
Member
+82|6848|Montreal
Because lowing, Iraq was not a hotbed for terrorism before the war, and now that the war has happened and Saddam is gone the terrorists are running the country, blowing each other and American troops up on a daily basis. This is not to suggest that Saddam was some wonderful guy, on the contrary he was a butcher and I condemned him throughout the 80s and 90s during his worst atrocities which had overwhelming U.S. support. But it seems to me that exposing the war plans for Iraq was not helping the terrorists because there were no terrorists in Iraq at the time. But the war itself has helped the terrorists tremendously. They cannot thank George Bush enough for giving them a new breeding ground for the next generation of terrorists. So it seems to me the only thing proven here is that George Bush and his war planners are helping the terrorists. Conservative terrorist loving scum. Sounds pretty ridiculous when its flipped around like that huh? It sounds equally ridiculous when you accuse all liberals of being terrorist loving scum.

As for the other article, George Bush pissing on the first and fourth amendment of the constitution by illegally spying on millions of Americans is about the most anyone has ever done to help the terrorists destroy our freedoms that they hate so much.

Last edited by JimmyBotswana (2006-09-04 05:56:30)

2006-09-04 06:25:35
lowing
Banned
+1,662|6913|USA

JimmyBotswana wrote:

Because lowing, Iraq was not a hotbed for terrorism before the war, and now that the war has happened and Saddam is gone the terrorists are running the country, blowing each other and American troops up on a daily basis. This is not to suggest that Saddam was some wonderful guy, on the contrary he was a butcher and I condemned him throughout the 80s and 90s during his worst atrocities which had overwhelming U.S. support. But it seems to me that exposing the war plans for Iraq was not helping the terrorists because there were no terrorists in Iraq at the time. But the war itself has helped the terrorists tremendously. They cannot thank George Bush enough for giving them a new breeding ground for the next generation of terrorists. So it seems to me the only thing proven here is that George Bush and his war planners are helping the terrorists. Conservative terrorist loving scum. Sounds pretty ridiculous when its flipped around like that huh? It sounds equally ridiculous when you accuse all liberals of being terrorist loving scum.

As for the other article, George Bush pissing on the first and fourth amendment of the constitution by illegally spying on millions of Americans is about the most anyone has ever done to help the terrorists destroy our freedoms that they hate so much.
Nooooo Jimmy, the NYT has printed ways the US govt. tracks financing of the terrorists ( programs that aided in capture of several terrorists) .

Also about wiretapping, you are more than a little paranoid if you think the govt. is listening in on, or care about, you sleeping with your wife's sister. In WW2 America had a lot more of their rights and freedoms curtailed than this.

Stop aiding the enemy, by constantly whining and complaining. The terrorists LOVE Americans like you, liberals are their best propaganda weapon.

Last edited by lowing (2006-09-04 06:26:08)

2006-09-04 06:52:37
JimmyBotswana
Member
+82|6848|Montreal

lowing wrote:

Nooooo Jimmy, the NYT has printed ways the US govt. tracks financing of the terrorists ( programs that aided in capture of several terrorists) .

Also about wiretapping, you are more than a little paranoid if you think the govt. is listening in on, or care about, you sleeping with your wife's sister. In WW2 America had a lot more of their rights and freedoms curtailed than this.

Stop aiding the enemy, by constantly whining and complaining. The terrorists LOVE Americans like you, liberals are their best propaganda weapon.
Well if the NYT printed that why don't you post that as evidence?

I am not paranoid I am not even an American I simply admire the U.S. constitution and the principles America was founded on and don't like to see George Bush destroying them. I think that is something worth complaining about, and the only people who won't complain about it are the freedom hating terrorists, and you apparently.
2006-09-04 07:37:42
lowing
Banned
+1,662|6913|USA

JimmyBotswana wrote:

lowing wrote:

Nooooo Jimmy, the NYT has printed ways the US govt. tracks financing of the terrorists ( programs that aided in capture of several terrorists) .

Also about wiretapping, you are more than a little paranoid if you think the govt. is listening in on, or care about, you sleeping with your wife's sister. In WW2 America had a lot more of their rights and freedoms curtailed than this.

Stop aiding the enemy, by constantly whining and complaining. The terrorists LOVE Americans like you, liberals are their best propaganda weapon.
Well if the NYT printed that why don't you post that as evidence?

I am not paranoid I am not even an American I simply admire the U.S. constitution and the principles America was founded on and don't like to see George Bush destroying them. I think that is something worth complaining about, and the only people who won't complain about it are the freedom hating terrorists, and you apparently.
http://select.nytimes.com/gst/abstract. … 94DE404482

If you wanna read about it,in the NYT you can pay for it.

So FDR and Truman were estroying America during WW2 with all of the restrictions and censoreship and spying that took place?  We DID have a constitution back then didn't we?? Time to get real Jimmy.


Nope I love my freedom. that is why I am willing to use every tool available to hinder the terrorist from taking it from me.
2006-09-04 07:44:23
jonsimon
Member
+224|6757

lowing wrote:

JimmyBotswana wrote:

lowing wrote:

Nooooo Jimmy, the NYT has printed ways the US govt. tracks financing of the terrorists ( programs that aided in capture of several terrorists) .

Also about wiretapping, you are more than a little paranoid if you think the govt. is listening in on, or care about, you sleeping with your wife's sister. In WW2 America had a lot more of their rights and freedoms curtailed than this.

Stop aiding the enemy, by constantly whining and complaining. The terrorists LOVE Americans like you, liberals are their best propaganda weapon.
Well if the NYT printed that why don't you post that as evidence?

I am not paranoid I am not even an American I simply admire the U.S. constitution and the principles America was founded on and don't like to see George Bush destroying them. I think that is something worth complaining about, and the only people who won't complain about it are the freedom hating terrorists, and you apparently.
http://select.nytimes.com/gst/abstract. … 94DE404482

If you wanna read about it,in the NYT you can pay for it.

So FDR and Truman were estroying America during WW2 with all of the restrictions and censoreship and spying that took place?  We DID have a constitution back then didn't we?? Time to get real Jimmy.


Nope I love my freedom. that is why I am willing to use every tool available to hinder the terrorist from taking it from me.
Ironically you're willing to sacrifice your freedom to protect it. Sounds like a lose-lose situation.
2006-09-04 07:57:45
lowing
Banned
+1,662|6913|USA

jonsimon wrote:

lowing wrote:

JimmyBotswana wrote:


Well if the NYT printed that why don't you post that as evidence?

I am not paranoid I am not even an American I simply admire the U.S. constitution and the principles America was founded on and don't like to see George Bush destroying them. I think that is something worth complaining about, and the only people who won't complain about it are the freedom hating terrorists, and you apparently.
http://select.nytimes.com/gst/abstract. … 94DE404482

If you wanna read about it,in the NYT you can pay for it.

So FDR and Truman were estroying America during WW2 with all of the restrictions and censoreship and spying that took place?  We DID have a constitution back then didn't we?? Time to get real Jimmy.


Nope I love my freedom. that is why I am willing to use every tool available to hinder the terrorist from taking it from me.
Ironically you're willing to sacrifice your freedom to protect it. Sounds like a lose-lose situation.
NO not at all, will you not comment on the WW2 sacrifices that were made? Or can you and still have that attitude. I will give you time to think up a good response.
2006-09-04 08:04:55
jonsimon
Member
+224|6757

lowing wrote:

jonsimon wrote:

Ironically you're willing to sacrifice your freedom to protect it. Sounds like a lose-lose situation.
NO not at all, will you not comment on the WW2 sacrifices that were made? Or can you and still have that attitude. I will give you time to think up a good response.
Any sacrifices made for WWII were unecessary, our government baited japan into attacking us to galvonize the population in support of the war. We shouldn't have been fighting anyway. Or, certainly not in the way we did.
2006-09-04 10:10:24
lowing
Banned
+1,662|6913|USA

jonsimon wrote:

lowing wrote:

jonsimon wrote:

Ironically you're willing to sacrifice your freedom to protect it. Sounds like a lose-lose situation.
NO not at all, will you not comment on the WW2 sacrifices that were made? Or can you and still have that attitude. I will give you time to think up a good response.
Any sacrifices made for WWII were unecessary, our government baited japan into attacking us to galvonize the population in support of the war. We shouldn't have been fighting anyway. Or, certainly not in the way we did.
Figures.
2006-09-04 13:17:59
JimmyBotswana
Member
+82|6848|Montreal

lowing wrote:

Nope I love my freedom. that is why I am willing to use every tool available to hinder the terrorist from taking it from me.
LOL I love my freedom therefore I am willing to give it up to protect it. I love your logic lowing, although it makes as much sense as all your other arguments.
2006-09-04 13:24:19
JimmyBotswana
Member
+82|6848|Montreal

lowing wrote:

So FDR and Truman were destroying America during WW2 with all of the restrictions and censoreship and spying that took place?  We DID have a constitution back then didn't we?? Time to get real Jimmy.
I don't understand your logic are you saying that it is ok to shred the constitution today because it happened in WWII? I don't know if you know anything about history lowing but WWII and this current "war on terror" are completely different. This current one has no end in sight, and will probably still be around when my grandkids are born. So it is ok in your view to lose all these freedoms for this war with no end?
2006-09-04 13:40:52
lowing
Banned
+1,662|6913|USA

JimmyBotswana wrote:

lowing wrote:

So FDR and Truman were destroying America during WW2 with all of the restrictions and censoreship and spying that took place?  We DID have a constitution back then didn't we?? Time to get real Jimmy.
I don't understand your logic are you saying that it is ok to shred the constitution today because it happened in WWII? I don't know if you know anything about history lowing but WWII and this current "war on terror" are completely different. This current one has no end in sight, and will probably still be around when my grandkids are born. So it is ok in your view to lose all these freedoms for this war with no end?
You don't WANT to understand the question because you simply can not answer it in your favor. The truth is sacrifices were made back then for national security reasons, and NOEONE BITCHED about it. Today only the liberal left is bitching and crying like little girls.
2006-09-04 14:24:21
JimmyBotswana
Member
+82|6848|Montreal

lowing wrote:

You don't WANT to understand the question because you simply can not answer it in your favor. The truth is sacrifices were made back then for national security reasons, and NOEONE BITCHED about it. Today only the liberal left is bitching and crying like little girls.
lowing that is the most mature, well-thought out response I have ever heard from you. /sarcasm

Last edited by JimmyBotswana (2006-09-04 15:24:31)

2006-09-04 15:21:02
lowing
Banned
+1,662|6913|USA

JimmyBotswana wrote:

lowing wrote:

You don't WANT to understand the question because you simply can not answer it in your favor. The truth is sacrifices were made back then for national security reasons, and NOEONE BITCHED about it. Today only the liberal left is bitching and crying like little girls.
lowing that is the most mature, well-thought out response I have ever heard from you.
Good so we are both in agreement then,..........I am right.
2006-09-04 15:24:48
JimmyBotswana
Member
+82|6848|Montreal
errrrrr, no.
2006-09-04 17:56:08
lowing
Banned
+1,662|6913|USA

JimmyBotswana wrote:

errrrrr, no.
Oh, then either deny that rights and freedoms were put on the back burner during WW2 or agree that it happened.

 

Pages: 1 … 5 6 7

Board footer

Privacy Policy - © 2025 Jeff Minard