Re: Stupid Americans! -- Stupid... Stupid... STUPID!!! __________==___ utivro
#181
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Stupid Americans! -- Stupid... Stupid... STUPID!!! __________==___ utivro
and yours by continuing the conversation. Please act with dignity and drop
the thread.
Dave Milne, Scotland
'91 Grand Wagoneer, '99 TJ
"ccr" <crhodes@nospam.com> wrote in message
news:10q271ps2prq8af@corp.supernews.com...
> Congratulations! Your post once again proves beyond a shadow of a doubt
the
> correctness of the subject line! Keep it up.
>
> --
> Prophetic Words: "On some great and glorious day the plain folks of the
land
> will reach their heart's desire at last and the White House will be
adorned
> by a downright moron." - H.L. Mencken
>
>
> "SoK66" <SoK66@frontier.net> wrote in message
> news:cnp0o302er5@enews2.newsguy.com...
> > "ccr" foolishly continued his ludicrous defense of the limp-wristed,
thug
> > loving, homo-promoting Democrats utter humiliation at the polls by
> > petulantly snapping:
> >
> >> What part of "percentage" don't you understand nitwit?>
> >
> > The part where your idiot, traitor candidate won by getting 48%, versus
> > his opponents 51%.
> >
> > Do yourself a favor, Soreloserman, and go back to the ---- sites where
you
> > came from.
>
>
the thread.
Dave Milne, Scotland
'91 Grand Wagoneer, '99 TJ
"ccr" <crhodes@nospam.com> wrote in message
news:10q271ps2prq8af@corp.supernews.com...
> Congratulations! Your post once again proves beyond a shadow of a doubt
the
> correctness of the subject line! Keep it up.
>
> --
> Prophetic Words: "On some great and glorious day the plain folks of the
land
> will reach their heart's desire at last and the White House will be
adorned
> by a downright moron." - H.L. Mencken
>
>
> "SoK66" <SoK66@frontier.net> wrote in message
> news:cnp0o302er5@enews2.newsguy.com...
> > "ccr" foolishly continued his ludicrous defense of the limp-wristed,
thug
> > loving, homo-promoting Democrats utter humiliation at the polls by
> > petulantly snapping:
> >
> >> What part of "percentage" don't you understand nitwit?>
> >
> > The part where your idiot, traitor candidate won by getting 48%, versus
> > his opponents 51%.
> >
> > Do yourself a favor, Soreloserman, and go back to the ---- sites where
you
> > came from.
>
>
#182
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Stupid Americans! -- Stupid... Stupid... STUPID!!! __________==___ utivro
and yours by continuing the conversation. Please act with dignity and drop
the thread.
Dave Milne, Scotland
'91 Grand Wagoneer, '99 TJ
"ccr" <crhodes@nospam.com> wrote in message
news:10q271ps2prq8af@corp.supernews.com...
> Congratulations! Your post once again proves beyond a shadow of a doubt
the
> correctness of the subject line! Keep it up.
>
> --
> Prophetic Words: "On some great and glorious day the plain folks of the
land
> will reach their heart's desire at last and the White House will be
adorned
> by a downright moron." - H.L. Mencken
>
>
> "SoK66" <SoK66@frontier.net> wrote in message
> news:cnp0o302er5@enews2.newsguy.com...
> > "ccr" foolishly continued his ludicrous defense of the limp-wristed,
thug
> > loving, homo-promoting Democrats utter humiliation at the polls by
> > petulantly snapping:
> >
> >> What part of "percentage" don't you understand nitwit?>
> >
> > The part where your idiot, traitor candidate won by getting 48%, versus
> > his opponents 51%.
> >
> > Do yourself a favor, Soreloserman, and go back to the ---- sites where
you
> > came from.
>
>
the thread.
Dave Milne, Scotland
'91 Grand Wagoneer, '99 TJ
"ccr" <crhodes@nospam.com> wrote in message
news:10q271ps2prq8af@corp.supernews.com...
> Congratulations! Your post once again proves beyond a shadow of a doubt
the
> correctness of the subject line! Keep it up.
>
> --
> Prophetic Words: "On some great and glorious day the plain folks of the
land
> will reach their heart's desire at last and the White House will be
adorned
> by a downright moron." - H.L. Mencken
>
>
> "SoK66" <SoK66@frontier.net> wrote in message
> news:cnp0o302er5@enews2.newsguy.com...
> > "ccr" foolishly continued his ludicrous defense of the limp-wristed,
thug
> > loving, homo-promoting Democrats utter humiliation at the polls by
> > petulantly snapping:
> >
> >> What part of "percentage" don't you understand nitwit?>
> >
> > The part where your idiot, traitor candidate won by getting 48%, versus
> > his opponents 51%.
> >
> > Do yourself a favor, Soreloserman, and go back to the ---- sites where
you
> > came from.
>
>
#183
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Stupid Americans! -- Stupid... Stupid... STUPID!!! __________==___ utivro
and yours by continuing the conversation. Please act with dignity and drop
the thread.
Dave Milne, Scotland
'91 Grand Wagoneer, '99 TJ
"ccr" <crhodes@nospam.com> wrote in message
news:10q271ps2prq8af@corp.supernews.com...
> Congratulations! Your post once again proves beyond a shadow of a doubt
the
> correctness of the subject line! Keep it up.
>
> --
> Prophetic Words: "On some great and glorious day the plain folks of the
land
> will reach their heart's desire at last and the White House will be
adorned
> by a downright moron." - H.L. Mencken
>
>
> "SoK66" <SoK66@frontier.net> wrote in message
> news:cnp0o302er5@enews2.newsguy.com...
> > "ccr" foolishly continued his ludicrous defense of the limp-wristed,
thug
> > loving, homo-promoting Democrats utter humiliation at the polls by
> > petulantly snapping:
> >
> >> What part of "percentage" don't you understand nitwit?>
> >
> > The part where your idiot, traitor candidate won by getting 48%, versus
> > his opponents 51%.
> >
> > Do yourself a favor, Soreloserman, and go back to the ---- sites where
you
> > came from.
>
>
the thread.
Dave Milne, Scotland
'91 Grand Wagoneer, '99 TJ
"ccr" <crhodes@nospam.com> wrote in message
news:10q271ps2prq8af@corp.supernews.com...
> Congratulations! Your post once again proves beyond a shadow of a doubt
the
> correctness of the subject line! Keep it up.
>
> --
> Prophetic Words: "On some great and glorious day the plain folks of the
land
> will reach their heart's desire at last and the White House will be
adorned
> by a downright moron." - H.L. Mencken
>
>
> "SoK66" <SoK66@frontier.net> wrote in message
> news:cnp0o302er5@enews2.newsguy.com...
> > "ccr" foolishly continued his ludicrous defense of the limp-wristed,
thug
> > loving, homo-promoting Democrats utter humiliation at the polls by
> > petulantly snapping:
> >
> >> What part of "percentage" don't you understand nitwit?>
> >
> > The part where your idiot, traitor candidate won by getting 48%, versus
> > his opponents 51%.
> >
> > Do yourself a favor, Soreloserman, and go back to the ---- sites where
you
> > came from.
>
>
#184
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Stupid Americans! -- Stupid... Stupid... STUPID!!! __________==___ utivro
Wrong DAWg! There were no substantive ties between Saddam Hussein and Bin
Laden or Al Qaeda--other than a fatwa declared by Bin Laden to overthrow
Saddam because he was too secular. It's hard to work with someone who has
worked for your downfall. Prior to that Bin Laden once tried to arrange a
partnership, but he was ignored. That's it. That's all the "ties"--they are
lies--just like the WMD.
--
Prophetic Words: "On some great and glorious day the plain folks of the land
will reach their heart's desire at last and the White House will be adorned
by a downright moron." - H.L. Mencken
"DAW" <davew@joink.com> wrote in message
news:cnr5an02b74@enews4.newsguy.com...
> Wrong! Yusef,
> There were plenty of ties found between Hussein, Al Quaeda, and Bin Laden.
> There were no ties found which coupled Hussein to 9/11.
> "David Gravereaux" <davygrvy@pobox.com> wrote in message
> news:32vvo0pbpa7tksotbltit9o63np7o0pdqp@4ax.com...
>> Brian Talley <btalley@rochester.rr.com> wrote:
>>
>>>3) We know Hussein hated the U.S., that he had ties with terrorists
>>>in general and al Qaeda in particular.
>>>
>>>Do the math.
>>
>> Untrue. No ties to Bin Ladden were found.
>>
>> All in all the specifics for WMDs that Bush told the public were false.
>> He has yet to make good on those mistakes.
>> --
>> David Gravereaux <davygrvy@pobox.com>
>> [species: human; planet: earth,milkyway(western spiral arm),alpha sector]
>
>
Laden or Al Qaeda--other than a fatwa declared by Bin Laden to overthrow
Saddam because he was too secular. It's hard to work with someone who has
worked for your downfall. Prior to that Bin Laden once tried to arrange a
partnership, but he was ignored. That's it. That's all the "ties"--they are
lies--just like the WMD.
--
Prophetic Words: "On some great and glorious day the plain folks of the land
will reach their heart's desire at last and the White House will be adorned
by a downright moron." - H.L. Mencken
"DAW" <davew@joink.com> wrote in message
news:cnr5an02b74@enews4.newsguy.com...
> Wrong! Yusef,
> There were plenty of ties found between Hussein, Al Quaeda, and Bin Laden.
> There were no ties found which coupled Hussein to 9/11.
> "David Gravereaux" <davygrvy@pobox.com> wrote in message
> news:32vvo0pbpa7tksotbltit9o63np7o0pdqp@4ax.com...
>> Brian Talley <btalley@rochester.rr.com> wrote:
>>
>>>3) We know Hussein hated the U.S., that he had ties with terrorists
>>>in general and al Qaeda in particular.
>>>
>>>Do the math.
>>
>> Untrue. No ties to Bin Ladden were found.
>>
>> All in all the specifics for WMDs that Bush told the public were false.
>> He has yet to make good on those mistakes.
>> --
>> David Gravereaux <davygrvy@pobox.com>
>> [species: human; planet: earth,milkyway(western spiral arm),alpha sector]
>
>
#185
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Stupid Americans! -- Stupid... Stupid... STUPID!!! __________==___ utivro
Wrong DAWg! There were no substantive ties between Saddam Hussein and Bin
Laden or Al Qaeda--other than a fatwa declared by Bin Laden to overthrow
Saddam because he was too secular. It's hard to work with someone who has
worked for your downfall. Prior to that Bin Laden once tried to arrange a
partnership, but he was ignored. That's it. That's all the "ties"--they are
lies--just like the WMD.
--
Prophetic Words: "On some great and glorious day the plain folks of the land
will reach their heart's desire at last and the White House will be adorned
by a downright moron." - H.L. Mencken
"DAW" <davew@joink.com> wrote in message
news:cnr5an02b74@enews4.newsguy.com...
> Wrong! Yusef,
> There were plenty of ties found between Hussein, Al Quaeda, and Bin Laden.
> There were no ties found which coupled Hussein to 9/11.
> "David Gravereaux" <davygrvy@pobox.com> wrote in message
> news:32vvo0pbpa7tksotbltit9o63np7o0pdqp@4ax.com...
>> Brian Talley <btalley@rochester.rr.com> wrote:
>>
>>>3) We know Hussein hated the U.S., that he had ties with terrorists
>>>in general and al Qaeda in particular.
>>>
>>>Do the math.
>>
>> Untrue. No ties to Bin Ladden were found.
>>
>> All in all the specifics for WMDs that Bush told the public were false.
>> He has yet to make good on those mistakes.
>> --
>> David Gravereaux <davygrvy@pobox.com>
>> [species: human; planet: earth,milkyway(western spiral arm),alpha sector]
>
>
Laden or Al Qaeda--other than a fatwa declared by Bin Laden to overthrow
Saddam because he was too secular. It's hard to work with someone who has
worked for your downfall. Prior to that Bin Laden once tried to arrange a
partnership, but he was ignored. That's it. That's all the "ties"--they are
lies--just like the WMD.
--
Prophetic Words: "On some great and glorious day the plain folks of the land
will reach their heart's desire at last and the White House will be adorned
by a downright moron." - H.L. Mencken
"DAW" <davew@joink.com> wrote in message
news:cnr5an02b74@enews4.newsguy.com...
> Wrong! Yusef,
> There were plenty of ties found between Hussein, Al Quaeda, and Bin Laden.
> There were no ties found which coupled Hussein to 9/11.
> "David Gravereaux" <davygrvy@pobox.com> wrote in message
> news:32vvo0pbpa7tksotbltit9o63np7o0pdqp@4ax.com...
>> Brian Talley <btalley@rochester.rr.com> wrote:
>>
>>>3) We know Hussein hated the U.S., that he had ties with terrorists
>>>in general and al Qaeda in particular.
>>>
>>>Do the math.
>>
>> Untrue. No ties to Bin Ladden were found.
>>
>> All in all the specifics for WMDs that Bush told the public were false.
>> He has yet to make good on those mistakes.
>> --
>> David Gravereaux <davygrvy@pobox.com>
>> [species: human; planet: earth,milkyway(western spiral arm),alpha sector]
>
>
#186
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Stupid Americans! -- Stupid... Stupid... STUPID!!! __________==___ utivro
Wrong DAWg! There were no substantive ties between Saddam Hussein and Bin
Laden or Al Qaeda--other than a fatwa declared by Bin Laden to overthrow
Saddam because he was too secular. It's hard to work with someone who has
worked for your downfall. Prior to that Bin Laden once tried to arrange a
partnership, but he was ignored. That's it. That's all the "ties"--they are
lies--just like the WMD.
--
Prophetic Words: "On some great and glorious day the plain folks of the land
will reach their heart's desire at last and the White House will be adorned
by a downright moron." - H.L. Mencken
"DAW" <davew@joink.com> wrote in message
news:cnr5an02b74@enews4.newsguy.com...
> Wrong! Yusef,
> There were plenty of ties found between Hussein, Al Quaeda, and Bin Laden.
> There were no ties found which coupled Hussein to 9/11.
> "David Gravereaux" <davygrvy@pobox.com> wrote in message
> news:32vvo0pbpa7tksotbltit9o63np7o0pdqp@4ax.com...
>> Brian Talley <btalley@rochester.rr.com> wrote:
>>
>>>3) We know Hussein hated the U.S., that he had ties with terrorists
>>>in general and al Qaeda in particular.
>>>
>>>Do the math.
>>
>> Untrue. No ties to Bin Ladden were found.
>>
>> All in all the specifics for WMDs that Bush told the public were false.
>> He has yet to make good on those mistakes.
>> --
>> David Gravereaux <davygrvy@pobox.com>
>> [species: human; planet: earth,milkyway(western spiral arm),alpha sector]
>
>
Laden or Al Qaeda--other than a fatwa declared by Bin Laden to overthrow
Saddam because he was too secular. It's hard to work with someone who has
worked for your downfall. Prior to that Bin Laden once tried to arrange a
partnership, but he was ignored. That's it. That's all the "ties"--they are
lies--just like the WMD.
--
Prophetic Words: "On some great and glorious day the plain folks of the land
will reach their heart's desire at last and the White House will be adorned
by a downright moron." - H.L. Mencken
"DAW" <davew@joink.com> wrote in message
news:cnr5an02b74@enews4.newsguy.com...
> Wrong! Yusef,
> There were plenty of ties found between Hussein, Al Quaeda, and Bin Laden.
> There were no ties found which coupled Hussein to 9/11.
> "David Gravereaux" <davygrvy@pobox.com> wrote in message
> news:32vvo0pbpa7tksotbltit9o63np7o0pdqp@4ax.com...
>> Brian Talley <btalley@rochester.rr.com> wrote:
>>
>>>3) We know Hussein hated the U.S., that he had ties with terrorists
>>>in general and al Qaeda in particular.
>>>
>>>Do the math.
>>
>> Untrue. No ties to Bin Ladden were found.
>>
>> All in all the specifics for WMDs that Bush told the public were false.
>> He has yet to make good on those mistakes.
>> --
>> David Gravereaux <davygrvy@pobox.com>
>> [species: human; planet: earth,milkyway(western spiral arm),alpha sector]
>
>
#187
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Stupid Americans! -- Stupid... Stupid... STUPID!!! __________==___ utivro
Boohoo. None of it matters. W and the Republicans have control of the
Whitehouse, the Senate and The House. Yahoo! And what's the deal about all
of this talk of "reaching across the aisle" to the Democrats?!? Why? Four
more years. Four more years of letting the world know WE'RE running things
and no we're not interested in being like Europe (nice place to visit, but I
wouldn't want to live there) or creating some "unified global state."
America is number one on so many levels and for good reasons, one of them
being *****.
Have a nice day and sleep safe tonight. And you're welcome.
-Fred
"***** Schneider" <swedish98@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:gdhsp0hkgr9otrac05l6988719ari8tuoo@4ax.com...
> Wasn't that much of a majority that you can claim all USAmericans are
> OK with his style (or lack thereof)...
>
>
> On Mon, 08 Nov 2004 21:54:37 GMT, Brian Talley
> <btalley@rochester.rr.com> wrote:
>
>>It amazes me how obtuse some can be about this, when facts are
>>so easily found which pop the bubble of inuendo, accusation and
>>vehement assertion that "Bush is a moron".
>>
>>David Gravereaux wrote:
>>> "Karl" <aufever@prodigy.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>>If you guys think Saddam is innocent, you may want to read this:
>>>
>>> I don't consider him innocent of "crimes"; don't change the topic.
>>
>>But Hussein's crimes are not enough to warrant an invasion of
>>his country, eh? How delightfully tolerant you are of other
>>cultures....
>>
>>> But I do consider Saddam innocent of the criteria for war as outlined by
>>> president Bush himself on Jan. 29, 2003
>>> (http://www.cnn.com/2003/ALLPOLITICS/...ranscript.8/):
>>
>>Nothing in this article is damning of President Bush.
>>
>>When Blix addressed the U.N. he said: "...Hussein had failed to
>>account for 25,000 liters of anthrax, 38,000 liters of botulinum
>>toxin and material for 500 tons of sarin, mustard agent and VX
>>nerve agent." (See
>>http://www.findarticles.com/p/articl...19/ai_97874290)
>>
>>Iraq had used WMDs on at least three occasions: against the people
>>living in the marsh regions to the south, against the Kurds to the
>>north, and against Iran.
>>
>>> 1. 500 ton of yellow cake uranium.
>>> - never found. The ties to Nigeria were proven false.
>>> http://newyorker.com/fact/content/?030331fa_fact1
>>
>>United Nations weapons inspectors visually accounted for several
>>tons of WMDs as of 1998 when they were kicked out by Hussein.
>>
>>We did find 500 tons of uranium:
>>http://www.signonsandiego.com/uniont...22uranium.html
>>
>>...and at least 1.8 tons of enriched uranium (yellow cake):
>>http://www.myrtlebeachonline.com/mld...aq/9101541.htm
>>
>>And coalition forces have encountered sarin and mustard gas:
>>http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,120137,00.html
>>
>>If President Bush is at fault, it is for wasting 14 months with
>>the United Nations trying to get them to put teeth into their
>>resolutions against Iraq.
>>
>>Now, of course, we know why: U.N. officials were deeply entrenched
>>in the Oil-for-Food scandal which involved many governments, among
>>them those vehemently opposed to the U.S. See:
>>http://www.heritage.org/Research/Int...ons/bg1748.cfm
>>http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1156004/posts
>>
>>I confess to being at a loss how you can ignore what Bush said vis
>>a vis what Hussein had done and what U.N. inspectors found, yet you
>>regurgitate unfounded vitriol against Bush and declare yourself an
>>intellectual. What are your thoughts on the U.N. and their now-open
>>corruption? Does it surprise you that France opposed the U.S. when
>>they were secretly dealing with Hussein? Does it bother you?
>>
>>If you hate America and Americans, that's fine. Say so, and then
>>we all know who we're dealing with. If you're interested in justice
>>and a peaceful world then you will have to improve your arguments
>>if you wish to cast Bush and the U.S. in a bad light.
>>
>>> 2. All the WMDs claimed they had "absolute and clear proof on" were
>>> never
>>> found.
>>
>>1) We know Hussein had them, as they were visually accounted for in
>>the late 1990's.
>>
>>2) We know Hussein had no qualms about using them.
>>
>>3) We know Hussein hated the U.S., that he had ties with terrorists
>>in general and al Qaeda in particular.
>>
>>Do the math.
>>
>>> So all that's left, like you said, was "Saddam is a bad man"... Given
>>> just that, is that a reason to invade the sovereignty of another nation?
>>
>>Did you whinge similarly when Bosnia was invaded and Milosovec was
>>deposed?
>>
>>> While we're at it, let's invade Cuba, too. Why stop with the mid-east?
>>> Screw sovereignty and the UN and even the Geneva Convention. That's the
>>> Bush way.. Bush to an oath to uphold the constitution, yet the "patriot
>>> act" denies article four in favor of illegal search and seizure.
>>
>>I'm detecting a very low wattage....
>>
>>The U.N. breaks its own laws. France, Germany, Russia and China all
>>trade with Iraq against U.N. resolutions, but that's okay. We get hit
>>in the world's worst --------- attack, and somehow we're the bad guys
>>for fighting back against regimes known to sponsor terrorism. Riiiight!
>>
>>You must be in profound dismay to learn there are so many stupid
>>Americans that Bush got elected with such a majority.
>>
>>Regards,
>>
>>Brian
>
Whitehouse, the Senate and The House. Yahoo! And what's the deal about all
of this talk of "reaching across the aisle" to the Democrats?!? Why? Four
more years. Four more years of letting the world know WE'RE running things
and no we're not interested in being like Europe (nice place to visit, but I
wouldn't want to live there) or creating some "unified global state."
America is number one on so many levels and for good reasons, one of them
being *****.
Have a nice day and sleep safe tonight. And you're welcome.
-Fred
"***** Schneider" <swedish98@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:gdhsp0hkgr9otrac05l6988719ari8tuoo@4ax.com...
> Wasn't that much of a majority that you can claim all USAmericans are
> OK with his style (or lack thereof)...
>
>
> On Mon, 08 Nov 2004 21:54:37 GMT, Brian Talley
> <btalley@rochester.rr.com> wrote:
>
>>It amazes me how obtuse some can be about this, when facts are
>>so easily found which pop the bubble of inuendo, accusation and
>>vehement assertion that "Bush is a moron".
>>
>>David Gravereaux wrote:
>>> "Karl" <aufever@prodigy.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>>If you guys think Saddam is innocent, you may want to read this:
>>>
>>> I don't consider him innocent of "crimes"; don't change the topic.
>>
>>But Hussein's crimes are not enough to warrant an invasion of
>>his country, eh? How delightfully tolerant you are of other
>>cultures....
>>
>>> But I do consider Saddam innocent of the criteria for war as outlined by
>>> president Bush himself on Jan. 29, 2003
>>> (http://www.cnn.com/2003/ALLPOLITICS/...ranscript.8/):
>>
>>Nothing in this article is damning of President Bush.
>>
>>When Blix addressed the U.N. he said: "...Hussein had failed to
>>account for 25,000 liters of anthrax, 38,000 liters of botulinum
>>toxin and material for 500 tons of sarin, mustard agent and VX
>>nerve agent." (See
>>http://www.findarticles.com/p/articl...19/ai_97874290)
>>
>>Iraq had used WMDs on at least three occasions: against the people
>>living in the marsh regions to the south, against the Kurds to the
>>north, and against Iran.
>>
>>> 1. 500 ton of yellow cake uranium.
>>> - never found. The ties to Nigeria were proven false.
>>> http://newyorker.com/fact/content/?030331fa_fact1
>>
>>United Nations weapons inspectors visually accounted for several
>>tons of WMDs as of 1998 when they were kicked out by Hussein.
>>
>>We did find 500 tons of uranium:
>>http://www.signonsandiego.com/uniont...22uranium.html
>>
>>...and at least 1.8 tons of enriched uranium (yellow cake):
>>http://www.myrtlebeachonline.com/mld...aq/9101541.htm
>>
>>And coalition forces have encountered sarin and mustard gas:
>>http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,120137,00.html
>>
>>If President Bush is at fault, it is for wasting 14 months with
>>the United Nations trying to get them to put teeth into their
>>resolutions against Iraq.
>>
>>Now, of course, we know why: U.N. officials were deeply entrenched
>>in the Oil-for-Food scandal which involved many governments, among
>>them those vehemently opposed to the U.S. See:
>>http://www.heritage.org/Research/Int...ons/bg1748.cfm
>>http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1156004/posts
>>
>>I confess to being at a loss how you can ignore what Bush said vis
>>a vis what Hussein had done and what U.N. inspectors found, yet you
>>regurgitate unfounded vitriol against Bush and declare yourself an
>>intellectual. What are your thoughts on the U.N. and their now-open
>>corruption? Does it surprise you that France opposed the U.S. when
>>they were secretly dealing with Hussein? Does it bother you?
>>
>>If you hate America and Americans, that's fine. Say so, and then
>>we all know who we're dealing with. If you're interested in justice
>>and a peaceful world then you will have to improve your arguments
>>if you wish to cast Bush and the U.S. in a bad light.
>>
>>> 2. All the WMDs claimed they had "absolute and clear proof on" were
>>> never
>>> found.
>>
>>1) We know Hussein had them, as they were visually accounted for in
>>the late 1990's.
>>
>>2) We know Hussein had no qualms about using them.
>>
>>3) We know Hussein hated the U.S., that he had ties with terrorists
>>in general and al Qaeda in particular.
>>
>>Do the math.
>>
>>> So all that's left, like you said, was "Saddam is a bad man"... Given
>>> just that, is that a reason to invade the sovereignty of another nation?
>>
>>Did you whinge similarly when Bosnia was invaded and Milosovec was
>>deposed?
>>
>>> While we're at it, let's invade Cuba, too. Why stop with the mid-east?
>>> Screw sovereignty and the UN and even the Geneva Convention. That's the
>>> Bush way.. Bush to an oath to uphold the constitution, yet the "patriot
>>> act" denies article four in favor of illegal search and seizure.
>>
>>I'm detecting a very low wattage....
>>
>>The U.N. breaks its own laws. France, Germany, Russia and China all
>>trade with Iraq against U.N. resolutions, but that's okay. We get hit
>>in the world's worst --------- attack, and somehow we're the bad guys
>>for fighting back against regimes known to sponsor terrorism. Riiiight!
>>
>>You must be in profound dismay to learn there are so many stupid
>>Americans that Bush got elected with such a majority.
>>
>>Regards,
>>
>>Brian
>
#188
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Stupid Americans! -- Stupid... Stupid... STUPID!!! __________==___ utivro
Boohoo. None of it matters. W and the Republicans have control of the
Whitehouse, the Senate and The House. Yahoo! And what's the deal about all
of this talk of "reaching across the aisle" to the Democrats?!? Why? Four
more years. Four more years of letting the world know WE'RE running things
and no we're not interested in being like Europe (nice place to visit, but I
wouldn't want to live there) or creating some "unified global state."
America is number one on so many levels and for good reasons, one of them
being *****.
Have a nice day and sleep safe tonight. And you're welcome.
-Fred
"***** Schneider" <swedish98@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:gdhsp0hkgr9otrac05l6988719ari8tuoo@4ax.com...
> Wasn't that much of a majority that you can claim all USAmericans are
> OK with his style (or lack thereof)...
>
>
> On Mon, 08 Nov 2004 21:54:37 GMT, Brian Talley
> <btalley@rochester.rr.com> wrote:
>
>>It amazes me how obtuse some can be about this, when facts are
>>so easily found which pop the bubble of inuendo, accusation and
>>vehement assertion that "Bush is a moron".
>>
>>David Gravereaux wrote:
>>> "Karl" <aufever@prodigy.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>>If you guys think Saddam is innocent, you may want to read this:
>>>
>>> I don't consider him innocent of "crimes"; don't change the topic.
>>
>>But Hussein's crimes are not enough to warrant an invasion of
>>his country, eh? How delightfully tolerant you are of other
>>cultures....
>>
>>> But I do consider Saddam innocent of the criteria for war as outlined by
>>> president Bush himself on Jan. 29, 2003
>>> (http://www.cnn.com/2003/ALLPOLITICS/...ranscript.8/):
>>
>>Nothing in this article is damning of President Bush.
>>
>>When Blix addressed the U.N. he said: "...Hussein had failed to
>>account for 25,000 liters of anthrax, 38,000 liters of botulinum
>>toxin and material for 500 tons of sarin, mustard agent and VX
>>nerve agent." (See
>>http://www.findarticles.com/p/articl...19/ai_97874290)
>>
>>Iraq had used WMDs on at least three occasions: against the people
>>living in the marsh regions to the south, against the Kurds to the
>>north, and against Iran.
>>
>>> 1. 500 ton of yellow cake uranium.
>>> - never found. The ties to Nigeria were proven false.
>>> http://newyorker.com/fact/content/?030331fa_fact1
>>
>>United Nations weapons inspectors visually accounted for several
>>tons of WMDs as of 1998 when they were kicked out by Hussein.
>>
>>We did find 500 tons of uranium:
>>http://www.signonsandiego.com/uniont...22uranium.html
>>
>>...and at least 1.8 tons of enriched uranium (yellow cake):
>>http://www.myrtlebeachonline.com/mld...aq/9101541.htm
>>
>>And coalition forces have encountered sarin and mustard gas:
>>http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,120137,00.html
>>
>>If President Bush is at fault, it is for wasting 14 months with
>>the United Nations trying to get them to put teeth into their
>>resolutions against Iraq.
>>
>>Now, of course, we know why: U.N. officials were deeply entrenched
>>in the Oil-for-Food scandal which involved many governments, among
>>them those vehemently opposed to the U.S. See:
>>http://www.heritage.org/Research/Int...ons/bg1748.cfm
>>http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1156004/posts
>>
>>I confess to being at a loss how you can ignore what Bush said vis
>>a vis what Hussein had done and what U.N. inspectors found, yet you
>>regurgitate unfounded vitriol against Bush and declare yourself an
>>intellectual. What are your thoughts on the U.N. and their now-open
>>corruption? Does it surprise you that France opposed the U.S. when
>>they were secretly dealing with Hussein? Does it bother you?
>>
>>If you hate America and Americans, that's fine. Say so, and then
>>we all know who we're dealing with. If you're interested in justice
>>and a peaceful world then you will have to improve your arguments
>>if you wish to cast Bush and the U.S. in a bad light.
>>
>>> 2. All the WMDs claimed they had "absolute and clear proof on" were
>>> never
>>> found.
>>
>>1) We know Hussein had them, as they were visually accounted for in
>>the late 1990's.
>>
>>2) We know Hussein had no qualms about using them.
>>
>>3) We know Hussein hated the U.S., that he had ties with terrorists
>>in general and al Qaeda in particular.
>>
>>Do the math.
>>
>>> So all that's left, like you said, was "Saddam is a bad man"... Given
>>> just that, is that a reason to invade the sovereignty of another nation?
>>
>>Did you whinge similarly when Bosnia was invaded and Milosovec was
>>deposed?
>>
>>> While we're at it, let's invade Cuba, too. Why stop with the mid-east?
>>> Screw sovereignty and the UN and even the Geneva Convention. That's the
>>> Bush way.. Bush to an oath to uphold the constitution, yet the "patriot
>>> act" denies article four in favor of illegal search and seizure.
>>
>>I'm detecting a very low wattage....
>>
>>The U.N. breaks its own laws. France, Germany, Russia and China all
>>trade with Iraq against U.N. resolutions, but that's okay. We get hit
>>in the world's worst --------- attack, and somehow we're the bad guys
>>for fighting back against regimes known to sponsor terrorism. Riiiight!
>>
>>You must be in profound dismay to learn there are so many stupid
>>Americans that Bush got elected with such a majority.
>>
>>Regards,
>>
>>Brian
>
Whitehouse, the Senate and The House. Yahoo! And what's the deal about all
of this talk of "reaching across the aisle" to the Democrats?!? Why? Four
more years. Four more years of letting the world know WE'RE running things
and no we're not interested in being like Europe (nice place to visit, but I
wouldn't want to live there) or creating some "unified global state."
America is number one on so many levels and for good reasons, one of them
being *****.
Have a nice day and sleep safe tonight. And you're welcome.
-Fred
"***** Schneider" <swedish98@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:gdhsp0hkgr9otrac05l6988719ari8tuoo@4ax.com...
> Wasn't that much of a majority that you can claim all USAmericans are
> OK with his style (or lack thereof)...
>
>
> On Mon, 08 Nov 2004 21:54:37 GMT, Brian Talley
> <btalley@rochester.rr.com> wrote:
>
>>It amazes me how obtuse some can be about this, when facts are
>>so easily found which pop the bubble of inuendo, accusation and
>>vehement assertion that "Bush is a moron".
>>
>>David Gravereaux wrote:
>>> "Karl" <aufever@prodigy.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>>If you guys think Saddam is innocent, you may want to read this:
>>>
>>> I don't consider him innocent of "crimes"; don't change the topic.
>>
>>But Hussein's crimes are not enough to warrant an invasion of
>>his country, eh? How delightfully tolerant you are of other
>>cultures....
>>
>>> But I do consider Saddam innocent of the criteria for war as outlined by
>>> president Bush himself on Jan. 29, 2003
>>> (http://www.cnn.com/2003/ALLPOLITICS/...ranscript.8/):
>>
>>Nothing in this article is damning of President Bush.
>>
>>When Blix addressed the U.N. he said: "...Hussein had failed to
>>account for 25,000 liters of anthrax, 38,000 liters of botulinum
>>toxin and material for 500 tons of sarin, mustard agent and VX
>>nerve agent." (See
>>http://www.findarticles.com/p/articl...19/ai_97874290)
>>
>>Iraq had used WMDs on at least three occasions: against the people
>>living in the marsh regions to the south, against the Kurds to the
>>north, and against Iran.
>>
>>> 1. 500 ton of yellow cake uranium.
>>> - never found. The ties to Nigeria were proven false.
>>> http://newyorker.com/fact/content/?030331fa_fact1
>>
>>United Nations weapons inspectors visually accounted for several
>>tons of WMDs as of 1998 when they were kicked out by Hussein.
>>
>>We did find 500 tons of uranium:
>>http://www.signonsandiego.com/uniont...22uranium.html
>>
>>...and at least 1.8 tons of enriched uranium (yellow cake):
>>http://www.myrtlebeachonline.com/mld...aq/9101541.htm
>>
>>And coalition forces have encountered sarin and mustard gas:
>>http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,120137,00.html
>>
>>If President Bush is at fault, it is for wasting 14 months with
>>the United Nations trying to get them to put teeth into their
>>resolutions against Iraq.
>>
>>Now, of course, we know why: U.N. officials were deeply entrenched
>>in the Oil-for-Food scandal which involved many governments, among
>>them those vehemently opposed to the U.S. See:
>>http://www.heritage.org/Research/Int...ons/bg1748.cfm
>>http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1156004/posts
>>
>>I confess to being at a loss how you can ignore what Bush said vis
>>a vis what Hussein had done and what U.N. inspectors found, yet you
>>regurgitate unfounded vitriol against Bush and declare yourself an
>>intellectual. What are your thoughts on the U.N. and their now-open
>>corruption? Does it surprise you that France opposed the U.S. when
>>they were secretly dealing with Hussein? Does it bother you?
>>
>>If you hate America and Americans, that's fine. Say so, and then
>>we all know who we're dealing with. If you're interested in justice
>>and a peaceful world then you will have to improve your arguments
>>if you wish to cast Bush and the U.S. in a bad light.
>>
>>> 2. All the WMDs claimed they had "absolute and clear proof on" were
>>> never
>>> found.
>>
>>1) We know Hussein had them, as they were visually accounted for in
>>the late 1990's.
>>
>>2) We know Hussein had no qualms about using them.
>>
>>3) We know Hussein hated the U.S., that he had ties with terrorists
>>in general and al Qaeda in particular.
>>
>>Do the math.
>>
>>> So all that's left, like you said, was "Saddam is a bad man"... Given
>>> just that, is that a reason to invade the sovereignty of another nation?
>>
>>Did you whinge similarly when Bosnia was invaded and Milosovec was
>>deposed?
>>
>>> While we're at it, let's invade Cuba, too. Why stop with the mid-east?
>>> Screw sovereignty and the UN and even the Geneva Convention. That's the
>>> Bush way.. Bush to an oath to uphold the constitution, yet the "patriot
>>> act" denies article four in favor of illegal search and seizure.
>>
>>I'm detecting a very low wattage....
>>
>>The U.N. breaks its own laws. France, Germany, Russia and China all
>>trade with Iraq against U.N. resolutions, but that's okay. We get hit
>>in the world's worst --------- attack, and somehow we're the bad guys
>>for fighting back against regimes known to sponsor terrorism. Riiiight!
>>
>>You must be in profound dismay to learn there are so many stupid
>>Americans that Bush got elected with such a majority.
>>
>>Regards,
>>
>>Brian
>
#189
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Stupid Americans! -- Stupid... Stupid... STUPID!!! __________==___ utivro
Boohoo. None of it matters. W and the Republicans have control of the
Whitehouse, the Senate and The House. Yahoo! And what's the deal about all
of this talk of "reaching across the aisle" to the Democrats?!? Why? Four
more years. Four more years of letting the world know WE'RE running things
and no we're not interested in being like Europe (nice place to visit, but I
wouldn't want to live there) or creating some "unified global state."
America is number one on so many levels and for good reasons, one of them
being *****.
Have a nice day and sleep safe tonight. And you're welcome.
-Fred
"***** Schneider" <swedish98@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:gdhsp0hkgr9otrac05l6988719ari8tuoo@4ax.com...
> Wasn't that much of a majority that you can claim all USAmericans are
> OK with his style (or lack thereof)...
>
>
> On Mon, 08 Nov 2004 21:54:37 GMT, Brian Talley
> <btalley@rochester.rr.com> wrote:
>
>>It amazes me how obtuse some can be about this, when facts are
>>so easily found which pop the bubble of inuendo, accusation and
>>vehement assertion that "Bush is a moron".
>>
>>David Gravereaux wrote:
>>> "Karl" <aufever@prodigy.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>>If you guys think Saddam is innocent, you may want to read this:
>>>
>>> I don't consider him innocent of "crimes"; don't change the topic.
>>
>>But Hussein's crimes are not enough to warrant an invasion of
>>his country, eh? How delightfully tolerant you are of other
>>cultures....
>>
>>> But I do consider Saddam innocent of the criteria for war as outlined by
>>> president Bush himself on Jan. 29, 2003
>>> (http://www.cnn.com/2003/ALLPOLITICS/...ranscript.8/):
>>
>>Nothing in this article is damning of President Bush.
>>
>>When Blix addressed the U.N. he said: "...Hussein had failed to
>>account for 25,000 liters of anthrax, 38,000 liters of botulinum
>>toxin and material for 500 tons of sarin, mustard agent and VX
>>nerve agent." (See
>>http://www.findarticles.com/p/articl...19/ai_97874290)
>>
>>Iraq had used WMDs on at least three occasions: against the people
>>living in the marsh regions to the south, against the Kurds to the
>>north, and against Iran.
>>
>>> 1. 500 ton of yellow cake uranium.
>>> - never found. The ties to Nigeria were proven false.
>>> http://newyorker.com/fact/content/?030331fa_fact1
>>
>>United Nations weapons inspectors visually accounted for several
>>tons of WMDs as of 1998 when they were kicked out by Hussein.
>>
>>We did find 500 tons of uranium:
>>http://www.signonsandiego.com/uniont...22uranium.html
>>
>>...and at least 1.8 tons of enriched uranium (yellow cake):
>>http://www.myrtlebeachonline.com/mld...aq/9101541.htm
>>
>>And coalition forces have encountered sarin and mustard gas:
>>http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,120137,00.html
>>
>>If President Bush is at fault, it is for wasting 14 months with
>>the United Nations trying to get them to put teeth into their
>>resolutions against Iraq.
>>
>>Now, of course, we know why: U.N. officials were deeply entrenched
>>in the Oil-for-Food scandal which involved many governments, among
>>them those vehemently opposed to the U.S. See:
>>http://www.heritage.org/Research/Int...ons/bg1748.cfm
>>http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1156004/posts
>>
>>I confess to being at a loss how you can ignore what Bush said vis
>>a vis what Hussein had done and what U.N. inspectors found, yet you
>>regurgitate unfounded vitriol against Bush and declare yourself an
>>intellectual. What are your thoughts on the U.N. and their now-open
>>corruption? Does it surprise you that France opposed the U.S. when
>>they were secretly dealing with Hussein? Does it bother you?
>>
>>If you hate America and Americans, that's fine. Say so, and then
>>we all know who we're dealing with. If you're interested in justice
>>and a peaceful world then you will have to improve your arguments
>>if you wish to cast Bush and the U.S. in a bad light.
>>
>>> 2. All the WMDs claimed they had "absolute and clear proof on" were
>>> never
>>> found.
>>
>>1) We know Hussein had them, as they were visually accounted for in
>>the late 1990's.
>>
>>2) We know Hussein had no qualms about using them.
>>
>>3) We know Hussein hated the U.S., that he had ties with terrorists
>>in general and al Qaeda in particular.
>>
>>Do the math.
>>
>>> So all that's left, like you said, was "Saddam is a bad man"... Given
>>> just that, is that a reason to invade the sovereignty of another nation?
>>
>>Did you whinge similarly when Bosnia was invaded and Milosovec was
>>deposed?
>>
>>> While we're at it, let's invade Cuba, too. Why stop with the mid-east?
>>> Screw sovereignty and the UN and even the Geneva Convention. That's the
>>> Bush way.. Bush to an oath to uphold the constitution, yet the "patriot
>>> act" denies article four in favor of illegal search and seizure.
>>
>>I'm detecting a very low wattage....
>>
>>The U.N. breaks its own laws. France, Germany, Russia and China all
>>trade with Iraq against U.N. resolutions, but that's okay. We get hit
>>in the world's worst --------- attack, and somehow we're the bad guys
>>for fighting back against regimes known to sponsor terrorism. Riiiight!
>>
>>You must be in profound dismay to learn there are so many stupid
>>Americans that Bush got elected with such a majority.
>>
>>Regards,
>>
>>Brian
>
Whitehouse, the Senate and The House. Yahoo! And what's the deal about all
of this talk of "reaching across the aisle" to the Democrats?!? Why? Four
more years. Four more years of letting the world know WE'RE running things
and no we're not interested in being like Europe (nice place to visit, but I
wouldn't want to live there) or creating some "unified global state."
America is number one on so many levels and for good reasons, one of them
being *****.
Have a nice day and sleep safe tonight. And you're welcome.
-Fred
"***** Schneider" <swedish98@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:gdhsp0hkgr9otrac05l6988719ari8tuoo@4ax.com...
> Wasn't that much of a majority that you can claim all USAmericans are
> OK with his style (or lack thereof)...
>
>
> On Mon, 08 Nov 2004 21:54:37 GMT, Brian Talley
> <btalley@rochester.rr.com> wrote:
>
>>It amazes me how obtuse some can be about this, when facts are
>>so easily found which pop the bubble of inuendo, accusation and
>>vehement assertion that "Bush is a moron".
>>
>>David Gravereaux wrote:
>>> "Karl" <aufever@prodigy.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>>If you guys think Saddam is innocent, you may want to read this:
>>>
>>> I don't consider him innocent of "crimes"; don't change the topic.
>>
>>But Hussein's crimes are not enough to warrant an invasion of
>>his country, eh? How delightfully tolerant you are of other
>>cultures....
>>
>>> But I do consider Saddam innocent of the criteria for war as outlined by
>>> president Bush himself on Jan. 29, 2003
>>> (http://www.cnn.com/2003/ALLPOLITICS/...ranscript.8/):
>>
>>Nothing in this article is damning of President Bush.
>>
>>When Blix addressed the U.N. he said: "...Hussein had failed to
>>account for 25,000 liters of anthrax, 38,000 liters of botulinum
>>toxin and material for 500 tons of sarin, mustard agent and VX
>>nerve agent." (See
>>http://www.findarticles.com/p/articl...19/ai_97874290)
>>
>>Iraq had used WMDs on at least three occasions: against the people
>>living in the marsh regions to the south, against the Kurds to the
>>north, and against Iran.
>>
>>> 1. 500 ton of yellow cake uranium.
>>> - never found. The ties to Nigeria were proven false.
>>> http://newyorker.com/fact/content/?030331fa_fact1
>>
>>United Nations weapons inspectors visually accounted for several
>>tons of WMDs as of 1998 when they were kicked out by Hussein.
>>
>>We did find 500 tons of uranium:
>>http://www.signonsandiego.com/uniont...22uranium.html
>>
>>...and at least 1.8 tons of enriched uranium (yellow cake):
>>http://www.myrtlebeachonline.com/mld...aq/9101541.htm
>>
>>And coalition forces have encountered sarin and mustard gas:
>>http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,120137,00.html
>>
>>If President Bush is at fault, it is for wasting 14 months with
>>the United Nations trying to get them to put teeth into their
>>resolutions against Iraq.
>>
>>Now, of course, we know why: U.N. officials were deeply entrenched
>>in the Oil-for-Food scandal which involved many governments, among
>>them those vehemently opposed to the U.S. See:
>>http://www.heritage.org/Research/Int...ons/bg1748.cfm
>>http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1156004/posts
>>
>>I confess to being at a loss how you can ignore what Bush said vis
>>a vis what Hussein had done and what U.N. inspectors found, yet you
>>regurgitate unfounded vitriol against Bush and declare yourself an
>>intellectual. What are your thoughts on the U.N. and their now-open
>>corruption? Does it surprise you that France opposed the U.S. when
>>they were secretly dealing with Hussein? Does it bother you?
>>
>>If you hate America and Americans, that's fine. Say so, and then
>>we all know who we're dealing with. If you're interested in justice
>>and a peaceful world then you will have to improve your arguments
>>if you wish to cast Bush and the U.S. in a bad light.
>>
>>> 2. All the WMDs claimed they had "absolute and clear proof on" were
>>> never
>>> found.
>>
>>1) We know Hussein had them, as they were visually accounted for in
>>the late 1990's.
>>
>>2) We know Hussein had no qualms about using them.
>>
>>3) We know Hussein hated the U.S., that he had ties with terrorists
>>in general and al Qaeda in particular.
>>
>>Do the math.
>>
>>> So all that's left, like you said, was "Saddam is a bad man"... Given
>>> just that, is that a reason to invade the sovereignty of another nation?
>>
>>Did you whinge similarly when Bosnia was invaded and Milosovec was
>>deposed?
>>
>>> While we're at it, let's invade Cuba, too. Why stop with the mid-east?
>>> Screw sovereignty and the UN and even the Geneva Convention. That's the
>>> Bush way.. Bush to an oath to uphold the constitution, yet the "patriot
>>> act" denies article four in favor of illegal search and seizure.
>>
>>I'm detecting a very low wattage....
>>
>>The U.N. breaks its own laws. France, Germany, Russia and China all
>>trade with Iraq against U.N. resolutions, but that's okay. We get hit
>>in the world's worst --------- attack, and somehow we're the bad guys
>>for fighting back against regimes known to sponsor terrorism. Riiiight!
>>
>>You must be in profound dismay to learn there are so many stupid
>>Americans that Bush got elected with such a majority.
>>
>>Regards,
>>
>>Brian
>
#190
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Stupid Americans! -- Stupid... Stupid... STUPID!!! __________==___ utivro
On Fri, 19 Nov 2004 20:30:00 GMT, Brian Talley
<btalley@rochester.rr.com> wrote:
>That President Bush received the largest number
>of votes in US history is telling.
The reason could be that in 2004 the US population
is now the largest in it's history.
<btalley@rochester.rr.com> wrote:
>That President Bush received the largest number
>of votes in US history is telling.
The reason could be that in 2004 the US population
is now the largest in it's history.